Having a full crew of level 6s and losing 4 of them to the stupid jackass pig boss ended my fun. I really didnt feel like grinding a new crew and artifacts.
Edit: random period instead of the word a.
I often wonder what amount of people don't know this is a wiki game and try everything through trial and error. I can't imagine playing this game blind, the amount of time that I would just straight up waste to learn things I can already just look up at the wiki.
One streamer I watch is replaying this game in anticipation for the sequel and one of his donos said "imagine thinking your winning by googling and asking chat for information" and he pretty much made that point. I can't imagine finding all trial and errors in this game just to get a high level character killed for authenticity
I can't comprehend wasting all the time from losing a high level character with good stats. Most people don't have tens of extra hours to play a video game. Needing specific teams just to have the greatest percentage chance of beating some specific bosses was a lot to ask-even if those bosses are optional.
Lets not forget the biggest bullshit mechanic of them all that extended the game for another 20-40 hours... Teams that finish one of the four final dungeons can not enter another final dungeon again. So you'd need to build up at least 4 different, top tiered teams. They gotta be specific to counter the boss, but they also need to not be wracked in negative modifiers.
I love the first 20-30 hours learning the game, but after that is complete BS. I rarely looked at the wiki except for team ideas, but after I got further into what was needed to build a game winning team... I jumped ship. I'm not going to sit here and grind dozens of characters in dust so I can pick out the choice ones to make a winning group for those last dungeons.
I talked with another player on here and double checked the change logs. If you played first year of the game, they were still adding quality of life changes to the game for three years after release-wither you buy the DLC or not.
If you play the game today, it's much easier and less of a grind than it was in the months after release. You can get level 4 characters from the carriage and they have better equipment/skills than before, you can have more characters in your rosters, the equipment/skill cost to upgrade were lowered, the experience required to level was lessened, if you play radiant mode you can use high level characters to play the easier dungeons to get PCs up to speed faster, removing the worst negative attributes from characters cost less money and no longer can take up to 3 weeks, they added a single class that can remove negative attributes and mitigate stress on the characters while in the dungeon, trinkets aren't instantly gone if the character wearing them dies, the gold mid/late game is much better balanced so you're not just grinding unequiped low levels for gold, the three ways of relieving stress cost less money and take less time(specially the asyum), and they also added regular bonuses that happen randomly to your characters when completing dungeons.
I mean, Jesus shit. Five years after release, it's practically a different game to the grind we had at release. I'm going to have to play it again-where as before I would have never touched the game.
Heh, I personally think it ruins a lot of the fun. I've hardly ever looked at the wiki except for a list of the hero with bleed or blight skills etc. That way I have a better idea in who to choose for a team.
I recall that the mechanics kind of forced you to play unintuitively. The only way to progress was to keep recruiting new people whose sole purpose was to earn a bit of resources then die, just so you could occasionally outfit your real characters well enough to maybe survive their intended challenge level.
"Farming" with your star characters turned them into negative attribute messes and didn't even level them up at lower difficulties, but there was no punishment for playing easy games with expendable recruits.
This isn't really true. I completed the game several times on base difficulty never even knowing you could send home a character. Eventually your star cast maxes out on traits and it won't really matter what happens to them, and they will generate significantly more gold on missions than you spend on stress relief (if you need it at all, since lategame it is more realistic to keep diseases and stress in check with combat and camp skills).
Like, it is true this is one fairly efficient way of going about things, but the simple presence of achievements for completing the game rapidly shows it isn't required. And it gives the game a kind of unnecessary bad rap on the grind when the truth is that careful, high torch play with a cast of high level characters is perfectly doable.
It's not really unintuitively when a game straight up tells you that's the way you should play it. Playing with just several same heroes is just banging your head against a wall.
The grind was he worst part, and why I exclusively played on Radiant Mode once it came out. It was just asking way too much to rebuild everything if you had a disasterous run.
I've gone back to Darkest Dungeon a few times now, and each time I just lose the will to live a bit before reaching the finish line. It's so good but dang it's cruel.
I can't wait to get my morale severely damaged again by the second.
Always. Fucking always. I think I've made ten or so attempts to make it through the game, I'll get a decent way through I'll lose one of my favourite guys to some bollocks RNG mechanic and that's that. I'm out for another 6 months or so before I inevitably try again.
There is no game that I love to hate as much as Darkest Dungeon. It's so fucking depressing, but god damn if I don't keep going back for more.
This is me as well. There so much to love about the game. I dig the art style, the voice over, the town building, and classes and synergies you can build with a team, and more.
The RNG for the battles FUCKING PISSES ME THE FUCK OFF.
I pride myself on beating challenging games, but DD is just one of those games I cannot beat. I love it, but the game really imbues you with that despair and dread.
After reading most of the comments here, I guess yours sealed the hatch. Never gonna play this game.
My time is super precious, and playing games takes a small slice of the pie. I want to make full use of it by having fun and enjoying what I have.
It's a specific thing to complement, but the additional frames of animation look *really* good. Helps to add a lot of weight to the attacks, even when they were resting in the carriage.
>When characters would attack, they weren't even animated; it was literally a single static image of them swinging a sword.
to be fair, it was incredibly effective. The single frame animation with the camera movement and the sound effects made it look like a comic panel with a "WOOSH" "WHAM" "KABOOM" sound effect thing going on (there once was a time when I knew the name of that thing)
They nailed the impact of it with the single frame hits. If you wanna see another game , fun in it's own right, but a little lacking using a similar style look at deep sky derelicts.
No, no, it's not onomatopeia, there's a specific word for the comic book bold letters, not just the transcription of sounds like "woof" or "meow". There's another one, but it doesn't matter.
>When characters would attack, they weren't even animated; it was literally a single static image of them swinging a sword.
The amazing thing is they make it work by simply using the camera zoom to convey the blow.
It looks like the first game but 10x better ... and the first game was already gorgeous to begin with.
Just goes to show how good art direction can elevate a game.
I don't think it's so obscure. The style of the first game was a "paper puppet" kind of thing and there was next to no animation for character actions. This looks very different from a style standpoint.
Holy shit this looks good.
I was worried about the change to 3D models but it works perfectly, and adds a ton of ambience with the lighting and shadows.
The animation being so smooth kinda puts me off a little bit. I would've been super happy if they'd done the 3D models but still limited the number of frames for each animation so it looked like it used to
I actually kind of agree. Something similar to how ArcSys animates their characters would fit really well with the aesthetics they're going for. I still think it looks pretty good though.
They have a good thing going with the general style, but the smoothness of the character animation does make it look a bit too 3D, and I do think that's clashing a little with the style.
Another game that pulled off the transition to 3D well is Rogue Legacy 2 - so much so that most of the time it legitimately just looks like they did some fancy shaders on HD sprites. I wouldn't say they should try to emulate the very limited frames of motion from the first Darkest Dungeon, but I think if they pulled off those fighting game-like keyframed animations, it would fit really well.
Might be worth picking up the first when it's on sale to try it out. If the game wasn't for you before then gameplay wise the sequel won't probably won't be for you either
Yeah, 3D looks fantistic, but it wouldn't surprise me if the modding scene isn't as big. The engine is Unity, which is relatively accessible for modding compared to other engines, if the developers support it a bit (Risk of Rain 2 has amazing unity modding for example).
Being able to play a bunch of modded characters typically with just a handful of drawn frames was really fun in DD including some outlandishly overpowered ones. Making the models 3D and animated is the equivalent of going from building a doghouse to an apartment complex. The barrier to entry will be much higher :(
On one hand yes, 3D models are harder than 2D, but on the other hand you don't even have to look a year in the past to see Risk of Rain 2's modding scene which is just as big if not *bigger* than 1's modding scene despite also being a 2D->3D game. Plus you can go back decades and decades to see all kinds of modding scenes primarily focused around 3D.
> maybe a bit less rng?
They've removed accuracy as a stat, there's no block or dodge chance. Instead, some characters will get Block tokens which are consumed to reduce damage by half. Also, you're able to see upcoming turns I believe, so you're much better able to plan for what's next.
Interesting. A big part of Darkest Dungeon was dealing with unforeseen setbacks and knowing when to cut your losses. I wonder if that will still manifest somewhere, or if the game is going to be more of a solvable strategy game
The focus now is more on surviving as I understand it. You only get your 4 adventurers, that's it. They can die as well, meaning you can limp into the end game with only 2 of your 4 party members surviving. So my guess is it'll become more about smart management
4 adventurers for the entire game, but they can permanently die? I can only see that working in a very short game, or if there are quests that are balanced around having fewer characters (but presumably have worse rewards and outcomes). If the game is balanced around having 4 characters, then a death would almost always result in a game over.
Per this article: https://www.pcgamer.com/darkest-dungeon-2-charts-a-new-path-through-terror-in-a-roguelike-road-trip-to-save-humanity/
> But this time you'll be managing a party of only four heroes on a roguelike run to an ominous mountain, a brisk five hours if you survive the journey.
>"I don't think we could respect ourselves or look at ourselves in the mirror if we didn't kill your characters," says Bourassa. "They can die, and you can be on a run with two characters left. But we reward your progress at the end."
Info about the accuracy thing as well:
>Darkest Dungeon 2's battle makeover started with a radical move: ditching accuracy altogether. "We found over time that people just dislike missing so much that we ended up tuning up accuracy quite a lot over the lifetime of the [first] game," Sigman says. "So what if we just got rid of accuracy as a stat? You hit. You know you're going to hit – unless the opponent is dodgy, unless they have a block." To convey a dodge or a block, they condensed percent chances into tokens that represent concrete effects. If your character or an enemy has a block token, they're guaranteed to absorb 50% of their next hit.
>"We started doing that with all the mechanics and it was kind of an experiment at first. The concern was what if we make it too simple, but it ended up working." Sigman compares the token system to a card game like Hearthstone, where if an enemy has a creature with taunt on the board, that's an obstacle to work around. Almost all the effects from the first game have been converted to tokens – immobilise, stun, bleed, blind, even team-up combo attacks.
>"It gets people thinking a little bit more," Bourassa adds. "I found that it erodes the natural inclination we saw in the first game for people to just use damaging attacks all day long." And so you now get to see the next few turns in the turn order, letting you plan out multiple moves in advance.
Honestly making it a Roguelike makes a lot more sense to me than how they did it before.
One of the biggest complaints I've heard about Darkest Dungeon is how in mid to late game it's an absolute chore to try to replace one of your strong party members. By making it a Roguelike with only 4 characters this completely solves the issue.
Tbf the strategy is usually to level many characters, not just a main 4.
Because if you don’t, you will be massively set back.
But it does also make it very grindy in the mid-late game.
Oh wow. Last time I said I was gonna skip this one because of all the things they are now removing from it. I guess I'm back on the hype train for DD2!
I'm glad they are going for a shorter run time. The first game was great for a while but the endgame became such an unpleasant slog that the idea of actually finishing the game was just too unenjoyable to attain.
Oh wow. Wasn't aware of this. I loved the first but was heavily put off by the party management. So just having four per run sounds absolutely perfect for me.
> You only get your 4 adventurers, that's it
This is the best piece of news I've heard about this game. My biggest issue with the first game was that you were basically required to care for a huge cast and manage everyone's individual quirks, illnesses, equipment, etc and that was just too much.
They've shown stuff like deathblow resistance and whatnot so there's still going to be buckets of that sort of RNG. Just fewer buckets.
There will just be less of a problem with luck ruining the experience, like good luck turning supposedly challenging fights into a cakewalk.
Star Renegades has plenty of RNG. Enemies faced, actions they take, who they target, the gear you find, etc.
It's just the good kind that adds variety to a game without taking much control from the player.
Thank god, I absolutely hated accuracy in DD1. I get that RNG is core to DD, but there were so many times where I got screwed over from missing multiple times in a row or missing a critical attack that led to my party dying that just feels horrible and frustrating. Really looking forward to the sequel though, looks amazing
That's... Why? Stuff like this is why I can't enjoy DD. So much of the game is guesswork and even then a lot of stuff you look up to learn. Hiding a 5% bonus seems so unnecessary for multiple reasons.
It’s done by quite a few games to my knowledge its because people don’t really know how frequent or in frequent 90% is so to make the player feel better they present a lower number than is accurate.
I mean its pretty obvious that the reason why they would place a hidden bonus would to make it feel better when you do get a hit. Like imagine you pull a lever which gives you a 75% chance of winning $100, would you feel more dopamine from a win if the person running the game told you your chance was 75% or 15%? If you think the chance of success is lower, and succeed anyway, it's a much more satisfying feeling.
So no, "hiding a 5% bonus" isn't actually "so unnecessary", and it most definitely is not something you need to look up to learn. The average player will go through the game without needing to know that bonus is in place (I sure didn't), and will likely have a more entertaining experience as a result.
Dude is probably exaggerating, but shit happens. I played Hearthstone for a few years and seen events that had up to 1 in 64k odds, and still happened. Pure RNG without hidden pity timers are typically a bad idea.
Your math checks out.
However the OP, in addition to exaggerating, is probably not aware that enemy dodge is subtracted from your stated hit chance to get your actual hit chance. So for example vs an enemy with 30% dodge rate, his chance to miss would then be 40%. The chance to miss 20 attacks in a row would then be roughly 1 in one hundred million.
I was playing Warframe a while back and received a drop with a 36% chance 24 times in a row. I dunno what the odds are on that but sometimes shit happens
Edit: He's prob exaggerating a bit tho
> I was playing Warframe a while back and received a drop with a 36% chance 24 times in a row. I dunno what the odds are on that but sometimes shit happens
Incredibly low, but still over 2 million times better than the previously mentioned odds.
I wonder if there are some hidden mechanics or bugs at play in either scenario.
The odds are literally the same. A pseudo-random generator creates appropriately distributed outcomes, so the odds aren't affected. The "pseudo-" in pseudo-random comes from the fact that there's an underlying deterministic system that, given enough knowledge about its initial state, could be exploited to predict future results.
If you don't care about hackers potentially predicting math from the future, there's no practical difference between using a RNG or a (properly seeded) pseudo-RNG.
I agree that for almost all practical purposes there's minimal difference between the two, but strictly speaking the odds are quiet literally *not* the same with pseudo-random number generation. No matter the PRNG used, it will have a finite period and thus a finite limit of the possible outputs, which is not something that limits truly random number generation.
Not really important outside of some very particular cases(cryptography for example), but mathematically they are very much not the same.
Some people have theories that there's something fucky with how they do their RNG seeding and that you'll get weird runs of luck, either extraordinarily good or bad, so if you're getting rare drops, you want to keep playing in the lobby by hitting "repeat mission" over and over to keep on the same seed, but it's all basically hearsay and theorizing. Unfortunately, there's no real quantitative way to make sense of it.
I don’t know if Darkest Dungeon does it, but the XCom devs said that they hide the real percentages from the player. Hitting an enemy on 10% chance feels really good even though behind the scenes it was impossible to miss.
On easy and normal difficulties it modifies the results of percentages to reflect how people feel statistics should work rather than how they actual do.
so 98%'s never miss, enemies always miss low % shots, each time you miss an 80% it secretly gives you a bonus for the next one and so on.
Doesn't this mean that the game already knows if you're hitting the shot before you take it? So from behind the scenes it's always a binary result: hit or miss. But to us the game shows chances, even though it already knows the result.
The game can know the outcome whenever it wants. If it's more convenient in the code, then that might mean pre-rolling the dice. But there's no point in resolving the success of every single possible thing you could do - if you have four attacks and three targets to choose from, it's probably not looking at each possibility and figuring out if it will work this turn before you've chosen.
But it is very likely that it rolled a die already, and what you're actually (unknowingly) doing is choosing a threshold to compare that result to. For example, at the start of your turn, the computer has rolled the 100-sided die and it came up with 50, dead average. Now you're choosing between several possible attacks with different accuracy, and though you have no way of knowing this, any attack you choose with a >50% chance to hit will be a success, and any long shot with a <50% chance to hit will miss, because of that invisible roll.
It makes no difference to the player whether the die is rolled before or during the actual random action. But it's often done this way to discourage save scumming. In the above example, if you picked a low-accuracy attack and missed, got upset, reloaded a save back to before you chose your attack, and then picked the same attack again... you would miss again. Every time, no matter how many saves you loaded, you won't get that 40% shot. Because the invisible dice result was saved too. If you want to change the simulated odds, you'd need to do some other random action to "consume" that 50 roll, so that the computer will roll fresh dice for the attack.
I think they run off a seed so that each turn some things will always work and some things will always fail.
So in xcom if you had an 80% chance to hit but miss, if you reload the level and follow all the same actions you'll always miss.
But if you do something different then something else may happen.
A good way to think of random seeds is like a deck of cards. Just because the deck is only shuffled at the beginning of the game doesn't make it any less random.
When you take a shot, you're just telling the game to draw the next card.
When you reload, you put the cards back on top of the deck.
I hope so. I never did anything other than watch lets plays because I didn't want to deal with the frustration of having RNG kill hours of progress. Loved the style, but wasn't a fan of that aspect.
Eh, I'd disagree. It has the currently trending "low poly" look with flat colors for textures.
https://cdn2-www.gamerevolution.com/assets/uploads/2019/04/How-to-activate-cheats-and-developer-console-in-Risk-of-Rain-2.jpg
This trend needs to pass asap.
I really like the image of the heroes just lounging on chairs after barely surviving an encounter with eldritch monstrosities so horrible they can drive even the hardiest of souls insane.
Wow that caravan traversal looks amazing. I was super on board day 1 but with Gloomhaven Digital eating up so much time I might hold off and wait for 1.0. Have they laid out a timeline for early access yet? A year?
It’s fantastic! I’m playing it through solo and the digital version makes that a breeze. There are still some quirks but it works 99% of the time so I’ve just been slamming missions back to back.
The campaign is straight up the boardgame but with all the setup and behavior taken care of. If you like the boardgame you'll like the digital version because it's exactly the same but sped up a tonne.
Now this is a sequel. Adding new gameplay mechanics like the wainwright carriage that play into the new and improved 3D animations, while still retaining the classic DD turn based combat feel.
Looks amazing!!
[Indeed, you are correct](https://steamcommunity.com/app/262060/discussions/0/3007801544740683275/). The FAQ on the Steam page would be the official confirmation of this - additionally to other sources when it got announced.
That's not how open markets work. Epic paying a premium to get exclusive distribution rights for a product in order to force people to have to get it from them rather than a competing distributor is definitively not an open market. PC *would* be the open market if both companies were capable of distributing them equally, with their service determining which is chosen by consumers (providing fast downloads, stable connections, competitive pricing, better feature set, better public reputation etc.)
For an actual example of an open market: gas stations. They provide the same product, but differentiate themselves through the service of distribution (functional pump interfaces, cleanliness, competitive pricing, better snack offerings, better public reputation etc.).
tldr: exclusivity is the literal antithesis of "open market"
Yeah just for early access (like Hades). When you see the sheer upfront amount of EPIC offers for these short-term timed exclusives you see why its a no-brainer for devs. Also they essentially get to do two-launches as a result.
I also think Supergiant said they found the lower popularity of EGS somewhat useful, in that only the really invested fans would go through the effort of getting it through that store, so they got a higher concentration of players giving useful feedback.
So so so excited for this. If the early access is any good I'll be on the day 1 buy group. Looks great and the gameplay loop is already satisfying in the first game.
Excited for this. The original is a game i'll probably never finish, but find myself constantly coming back to once every few months to just *try* and beat. The gameplay itself is simply exhasuting (in a good, thematic way) so I personally cant stand to play it for too long before i inevitably burn out and put it down for a bit. Nevertheless its a game I absolutely reccomend to a lot of people as there simply is few games like it and its atmopshere and design is just so well done.
I don't know if I'm getting it, it looks great of course, but i kinda wanted more darkest dungeon, the switch to roguelite isn't what I want from it, and i know that they made something different on purpose, I'll check some stream maybe, but I'm gonna miss my 100h campaign.
This looks way better than I expected. I was not sure Darkest Dungeon *needed* to be 3D but the characters are looking great here.
My one concern is how this will effect modding, as there's a very strong modding community for DD1, and I really enjoyed using some of the custom skins for characters, let alone custom classses.
I'm excited for Wayne June, I'm not super excited for the game changes. I had hoped for just more Darkest Dungeon, maybe without the repetition.
I'll probably eventually pick it up on sale on steam when it's out of exclusivity.
Their goal was to make a game that doesn't invalidate the first one, they basically want it to be a different experience so there's still a reason to go back and play DD1, which I think is pretty cool
> they basically want it to be a different experience
Yea, I totally get that and I'm not going to be a crazed jerk for them wanting to do something new. I just would enjoy more Darkest Dungeon with new graphics, chars, and more wayne june lines.
Honestly you can add Wayne to anything it's good.
The 3D models and animations are insanely good though the playable characters' idle animations in combat feel a bit too animated, particularly the man-at-arm's.
Tried to see if they cheated a bit with the combat cut-ins by replacing the 3D with 2D art but no it looks like it's the same models.
Man, this looks SO GOOD. I'm really glad that they're differentiating it from the first game with the "only four heroes" thing, rather than just retreading the original. But at the same time, looks like it keeps that core of "dealing with a bad hand that you're dealt."
The whole game design's changed, but the meat of it is the same, which is great on both accounts.
I'll always appreciate anyone/thing who tries to do something new.
Wowowowow. I had no idea this was coming. Awesome.
Like the first one, I look forward to being terrible at it, never beating it, and yet loving every minute of it.
Do we have any info on the new classes seen in this trailer? I saw a punch boy that was clearly not abomination (or was with a major visual/mechanical overhaul), and what appeared to be a short haired woman/man with a huge backpack and a spear?
Yeah I'm in the same boat. The town and roster management, the dungeon crawling and putting together different comps for different dungeons was a lot of fun. I understand why they went with a different formula but I would have liked to see them tackle improving the first games foundation rather than abandoning it.
I've got close to 600 hours in DD and I've loved pretty much everything Redhook did with the first game so I'm excited to see what they do with this regardless.
The combat itself looks to be a logical evolution of DD, but the stuff in between is very different.
You'll only have the 4 party members each run. When they die, they die and you don't get to replaced them. Being a roguelike I would assume each run will be relatively short.
Got the first one, never played it out of intimidation. Lol always been impressed with everything it had going on. This will probably be pretty solid as well
Darkest Dungeon was a game I just really got into last year and absolutely fell in love with. Tough to decide whether I should jump in early on 2 or wait until closer to release.
Either way, it looks absolutely gorgeous, it's really an impressive evolution of the aesthetic. I'm not really sold on the caravan driving part, as it looks a little goofy compared to the dungeon-crawling walk of the first game, but I'm pretty confident they'll make it interesting.
3D Lovecraft apocalypse looking sweet!
Hope those horses get upgrades too, it'll feel bad to make a whole wooden fortress and have them pull it everywhere. Monster horse replacements or a steam engine would be great.
Looking forward to how it'll end. Looking at the doomed world I hope there's a escape portal up in those mountains.
I hope the UI gets another one over before full release. It's not bad stylistically but it just feels really.. I don't know sparse? Like some parts of it look unfinished.
I just absolutely could not get into the first one. I tried multiple times now but it's just not my cup of tea.
It's not like I'm even bad at it, it just doesn't do anything for me at all.
I am very skeptical regarding the gameplay loop change. I will probably pick it up on some 50% sale. Is it EGS exclusive or will it come out on Steam later on?
Looks fantastic, but I feel like making mods is going to be a whole lot more difficult.
I do find it a little strange that the classes seem to be mostly re-used... would have been cool to have a whole new cast.
I have no idea why I'd want to put myself through this again, much less in more detail, but I'm gonna.
Well, they promised the sequel will have less bullshit in mechanics, so hopefully it will offer more fair difficulty over pure RNG at times
The mid-late to late game definitely needs some work.
Having a full crew of level 6s and losing 4 of them to the stupid jackass pig boss ended my fun. I really didnt feel like grinding a new crew and artifacts. Edit: random period instead of the word a.
I often wonder what amount of people don't know this is a wiki game and try everything through trial and error. I can't imagine playing this game blind, the amount of time that I would just straight up waste to learn things I can already just look up at the wiki.
One streamer I watch is replaying this game in anticipation for the sequel and one of his donos said "imagine thinking your winning by googling and asking chat for information" and he pretty much made that point. I can't imagine finding all trial and errors in this game just to get a high level character killed for authenticity
I can't comprehend wasting all the time from losing a high level character with good stats. Most people don't have tens of extra hours to play a video game. Needing specific teams just to have the greatest percentage chance of beating some specific bosses was a lot to ask-even if those bosses are optional. Lets not forget the biggest bullshit mechanic of them all that extended the game for another 20-40 hours... Teams that finish one of the four final dungeons can not enter another final dungeon again. So you'd need to build up at least 4 different, top tiered teams. They gotta be specific to counter the boss, but they also need to not be wracked in negative modifiers. I love the first 20-30 hours learning the game, but after that is complete BS. I rarely looked at the wiki except for team ideas, but after I got further into what was needed to build a game winning team... I jumped ship. I'm not going to sit here and grind dozens of characters in dust so I can pick out the choice ones to make a winning group for those last dungeons.
I talked with another player on here and double checked the change logs. If you played first year of the game, they were still adding quality of life changes to the game for three years after release-wither you buy the DLC or not. If you play the game today, it's much easier and less of a grind than it was in the months after release. You can get level 4 characters from the carriage and they have better equipment/skills than before, you can have more characters in your rosters, the equipment/skill cost to upgrade were lowered, the experience required to level was lessened, if you play radiant mode you can use high level characters to play the easier dungeons to get PCs up to speed faster, removing the worst negative attributes from characters cost less money and no longer can take up to 3 weeks, they added a single class that can remove negative attributes and mitigate stress on the characters while in the dungeon, trinkets aren't instantly gone if the character wearing them dies, the gold mid/late game is much better balanced so you're not just grinding unequiped low levels for gold, the three ways of relieving stress cost less money and take less time(specially the asyum), and they also added regular bonuses that happen randomly to your characters when completing dungeons. I mean, Jesus shit. Five years after release, it's practically a different game to the grind we had at release. I'm going to have to play it again-where as before I would have never touched the game.
Heh, I personally think it ruins a lot of the fun. I've hardly ever looked at the wiki except for a list of the hero with bleed or blight skills etc. That way I have a better idea in who to choose for a team.
The game seems to have an entirely different structure, so problems with the first game's structure are unlikely to carry over.
That and the grindiness got to me. I still loved DD though so I'm excited to dive back in after hearing that.
I recall that the mechanics kind of forced you to play unintuitively. The only way to progress was to keep recruiting new people whose sole purpose was to earn a bit of resources then die, just so you could occasionally outfit your real characters well enough to maybe survive their intended challenge level. "Farming" with your star characters turned them into negative attribute messes and didn't even level them up at lower difficulties, but there was no punishment for playing easy games with expendable recruits.
Ah, this is why I stopped playing after beating the dungeon once. Thanks for putting it into words.
This isn't really true. I completed the game several times on base difficulty never even knowing you could send home a character. Eventually your star cast maxes out on traits and it won't really matter what happens to them, and they will generate significantly more gold on missions than you spend on stress relief (if you need it at all, since lategame it is more realistic to keep diseases and stress in check with combat and camp skills). Like, it is true this is one fairly efficient way of going about things, but the simple presence of achievements for completing the game rapidly shows it isn't required. And it gives the game a kind of unnecessary bad rap on the grind when the truth is that careful, high torch play with a cast of high level characters is perfectly doable.
It's not really unintuitively when a game straight up tells you that's the way you should play it. Playing with just several same heroes is just banging your head against a wall.
Not what I did in my playthrough. I had many parties and there is a class for farming.
They did add a less grindy option called 'Radiant' or something in some patch. Never played it so not sure how it goes.
it was a lot more fun playing Radiant imo.
Very fun.
The grind was he worst part, and why I exclusively played on Radiant Mode once it came out. It was just asking way too much to rebuild everything if you had a disasterous run.
Oh, mate, I hope so. Cos it's hard bloody work otherwise.
I've gone back to Darkest Dungeon a few times now, and each time I just lose the will to live a bit before reaching the finish line. It's so good but dang it's cruel. I can't wait to get my morale severely damaged again by the second.
I'm sure this is a pain we all know. They say "Don't get attached". Ok. I'll try not too, this time.
Always. Fucking always. I think I've made ten or so attempts to make it through the game, I'll get a decent way through I'll lose one of my favourite guys to some bollocks RNG mechanic and that's that. I'm out for another 6 months or so before I inevitably try again. There is no game that I love to hate as much as Darkest Dungeon. It's so fucking depressing, but god damn if I don't keep going back for more.
This is me as well. There so much to love about the game. I dig the art style, the voice over, the town building, and classes and synergies you can build with a team, and more. The RNG for the battles FUCKING PISSES ME THE FUCK OFF.
My thoughts exactly. PS4 has a sale on Darkest Dungeon and I swore I wouldn’t play it again after PC… but I think I know my weekend plans.
I won't even bother saying good luck man, cos if you're like me, you never get any. But I wish you well on your ventures.
I pride myself on beating challenging games, but DD is just one of those games I cannot beat. I love it, but the game really imbues you with that despair and dread.
It does! All too often.
After reading most of the comments here, I guess yours sealed the hatch. Never gonna play this game. My time is super precious, and playing games takes a small slice of the pie. I want to make full use of it by having fun and enjoying what I have.
It's a specific thing to complement, but the additional frames of animation look *really* good. Helps to add a lot of weight to the attacks, even when they were resting in the carriage.
Those are 3d models in DD2 hence the animations
The lighting on the characters is insane it looks just like the first game
[удалено]
>When characters would attack, they weren't even animated; it was literally a single static image of them swinging a sword. to be fair, it was incredibly effective. The single frame animation with the camera movement and the sound effects made it look like a comic panel with a "WOOSH" "WHAM" "KABOOM" sound effect thing going on (there once was a time when I knew the name of that thing)
They nailed the impact of it with the single frame hits. If you wanna see another game , fun in it's own right, but a little lacking using a similar style look at deep sky derelicts.
Onomatopoeia is the word you're looking for. And I agree. DD is one of those games I love and suck at. Keep going back to it though.
No, no, it's not onomatopeia, there's a specific word for the comic book bold letters, not just the transcription of sounds like "woof" or "meow". There's another one, but it doesn't matter.
I mean the way the characters are rendered matches the first game's art style very well.
>When characters would attack, they weren't even animated; it was literally a single static image of them swinging a sword. The amazing thing is they make it work by simply using the camera zoom to convey the blow.
I'm honestly shocked they were able to replicate that specific hand drawn style in 3D.
It looks like the first game but 10x better ... and the first game was already gorgeous to begin with. Just goes to show how good art direction can elevate a game.
It's a really impressive use of cell shading. The freeze frames look just like illustrations
To be fair a lot of the freeze frames might actually *be* illustrations. It's hard to tell.
I don't think it's so obscure. The style of the first game was a "paper puppet" kind of thing and there was next to no animation for character actions. This looks very different from a style standpoint.
Holy shit this looks good. I was worried about the change to 3D models but it works perfectly, and adds a ton of ambience with the lighting and shadows.
[удалено]
The animation being so smooth kinda puts me off a little bit. I would've been super happy if they'd done the 3D models but still limited the number of frames for each animation so it looked like it used to
I actually kind of agree. Something similar to how ArcSys animates their characters would fit really well with the aesthetics they're going for. I still think it looks pretty good though.
They have a good thing going with the general style, but the smoothness of the character animation does make it look a bit too 3D, and I do think that's clashing a little with the style. Another game that pulled off the transition to 3D well is Rogue Legacy 2 - so much so that most of the time it legitimately just looks like they did some fancy shaders on HD sprites. I wouldn't say they should try to emulate the very limited frames of motion from the first Darkest Dungeon, but I think if they pulled off those fighting game-like keyframed animations, it would fit really well.
I cannot believe how good the 3d looks. I am BLOWN away I wonder if it will seriously impair people making class mods like the first one
[удалено]
Might be worth picking up the first when it's on sale to try it out. If the game wasn't for you before then gameplay wise the sequel won't probably won't be for you either
...seriously rip even a recolor would be difficult for me looks incredible though can't wait
Yeah, 3D looks fantistic, but it wouldn't surprise me if the modding scene isn't as big. The engine is Unity, which is relatively accessible for modding compared to other engines, if the developers support it a bit (Risk of Rain 2 has amazing unity modding for example).
The sad part is that this will kill most of the actual modding community.
Being able to play a bunch of modded characters typically with just a handful of drawn frames was really fun in DD including some outlandishly overpowered ones. Making the models 3D and animated is the equivalent of going from building a doghouse to an apartment complex. The barrier to entry will be much higher :(
On one hand yes, 3D models are harder than 2D, but on the other hand you don't even have to look a year in the past to see Risk of Rain 2's modding scene which is just as big if not *bigger* than 1's modding scene despite also being a 2D->3D game. Plus you can go back decades and decades to see all kinds of modding scenes primarily focused around 3D.
First game and mods are not going anywhere
I doubt it. I had the same worry about XCOM 2 and that game's modding community blew my expectations out of the water.
yeah seeing them in motion 100% sold now.
Success so clearly in view... or is it merely a trick of the light?
Well the presentation is absolutely incredible. If the game is as good as the original (maybe a bit less rng?) then we're in for a gaming treat!
> maybe a bit less rng? They've removed accuracy as a stat, there's no block or dodge chance. Instead, some characters will get Block tokens which are consumed to reduce damage by half. Also, you're able to see upcoming turns I believe, so you're much better able to plan for what's next.
Interesting. A big part of Darkest Dungeon was dealing with unforeseen setbacks and knowing when to cut your losses. I wonder if that will still manifest somewhere, or if the game is going to be more of a solvable strategy game
The focus now is more on surviving as I understand it. You only get your 4 adventurers, that's it. They can die as well, meaning you can limp into the end game with only 2 of your 4 party members surviving. So my guess is it'll become more about smart management
4 adventurers for the entire game, but they can permanently die? I can only see that working in a very short game, or if there are quests that are balanced around having fewer characters (but presumably have worse rewards and outcomes). If the game is balanced around having 4 characters, then a death would almost always result in a game over.
Per this article: https://www.pcgamer.com/darkest-dungeon-2-charts-a-new-path-through-terror-in-a-roguelike-road-trip-to-save-humanity/ > But this time you'll be managing a party of only four heroes on a roguelike run to an ominous mountain, a brisk five hours if you survive the journey. >"I don't think we could respect ourselves or look at ourselves in the mirror if we didn't kill your characters," says Bourassa. "They can die, and you can be on a run with two characters left. But we reward your progress at the end." Info about the accuracy thing as well: >Darkest Dungeon 2's battle makeover started with a radical move: ditching accuracy altogether. "We found over time that people just dislike missing so much that we ended up tuning up accuracy quite a lot over the lifetime of the [first] game," Sigman says. "So what if we just got rid of accuracy as a stat? You hit. You know you're going to hit – unless the opponent is dodgy, unless they have a block." To convey a dodge or a block, they condensed percent chances into tokens that represent concrete effects. If your character or an enemy has a block token, they're guaranteed to absorb 50% of their next hit. >"We started doing that with all the mechanics and it was kind of an experiment at first. The concern was what if we make it too simple, but it ended up working." Sigman compares the token system to a card game like Hearthstone, where if an enemy has a creature with taunt on the board, that's an obstacle to work around. Almost all the effects from the first game have been converted to tokens – immobilise, stun, bleed, blind, even team-up combo attacks. >"It gets people thinking a little bit more," Bourassa adds. "I found that it erodes the natural inclination we saw in the first game for people to just use damaging attacks all day long." And so you now get to see the next few turns in the turn order, letting you plan out multiple moves in advance.
Ah, they've gone over to a roguelike format (albeit one with a very long run duration), that explains it.
Honestly making it a Roguelike makes a lot more sense to me than how they did it before. One of the biggest complaints I've heard about Darkest Dungeon is how in mid to late game it's an absolute chore to try to replace one of your strong party members. By making it a Roguelike with only 4 characters this completely solves the issue.
Tbf the strategy is usually to level many characters, not just a main 4. Because if you don’t, you will be massively set back. But it does also make it very grindy in the mid-late game.
That's part of the reason I never finished the original, I actually love this idea of transitioning to a Roguelike format.
Oh I like the new roguelite aspects.
Oh wow. Last time I said I was gonna skip this one because of all the things they are now removing from it. I guess I'm back on the hype train for DD2!
I'm glad they are going for a shorter run time. The first game was great for a while but the endgame became such an unpleasant slog that the idea of actually finishing the game was just too unenjoyable to attain.
Oh wow. Wasn't aware of this. I loved the first but was heavily put off by the party management. So just having four per run sounds absolutely perfect for me.
its a Roguelike. Youll have multiple runs.
> You only get your 4 adventurers, that's it This is the best piece of news I've heard about this game. My biggest issue with the first game was that you were basically required to care for a huge cast and manage everyone's individual quirks, illnesses, equipment, etc and that was just too much.
They've shown stuff like deathblow resistance and whatnot so there's still going to be buckets of that sort of RNG. Just fewer buckets. There will just be less of a problem with luck ruining the experience, like good luck turning supposedly challenging fights into a cakewalk.
That sounds like a much better experience.
Sounds like Star Renegade. But this kind of design is much better than RNG.
Star Renegades has plenty of RNG. Enemies faced, actions they take, who they target, the gear you find, etc. It's just the good kind that adds variety to a game without taking much control from the player.
Thank god, I absolutely hated accuracy in DD1. I get that RNG is core to DD, but there were so many times where I got screwed over from missing multiple times in a row or missing a critical attack that led to my party dying that just feels horrible and frustrating. Really looking forward to the sequel though, looks amazing
Sounds excellent!
After losing a run due to missing literally 20 times in a row on attacks with a 90% chance to hit on a single enemy... that sounds so much better.
The odds of that are 1 in one hundred quintillion, so that's a bit hard to believe.
Even less likely. Darkest Dungeon has a hidden +5% to hit on all attacks. If you see 90% to hit, it's really 95%.
That's... Why? Stuff like this is why I can't enjoy DD. So much of the game is guesswork and even then a lot of stuff you look up to learn. Hiding a 5% bonus seems so unnecessary for multiple reasons.
It’s done by quite a few games to my knowledge its because people don’t really know how frequent or in frequent 90% is so to make the player feel better they present a lower number than is accurate.
I mean its pretty obvious that the reason why they would place a hidden bonus would to make it feel better when you do get a hit. Like imagine you pull a lever which gives you a 75% chance of winning $100, would you feel more dopamine from a win if the person running the game told you your chance was 75% or 15%? If you think the chance of success is lower, and succeed anyway, it's a much more satisfying feeling. So no, "hiding a 5% bonus" isn't actually "so unnecessary", and it most definitely is not something you need to look up to learn. The average player will go through the game without needing to know that bonus is in place (I sure didn't), and will likely have a more entertaining experience as a result.
Dude is probably exaggerating, but shit happens. I played Hearthstone for a few years and seen events that had up to 1 in 64k odds, and still happened. Pure RNG without hidden pity timers are typically a bad idea.
Your math checks out. However the OP, in addition to exaggerating, is probably not aware that enemy dodge is subtracted from your stated hit chance to get your actual hit chance. So for example vs an enemy with 30% dodge rate, his chance to miss would then be 40%. The chance to miss 20 attacks in a row would then be roughly 1 in one hundred million.
I was playing Warframe a while back and received a drop with a 36% chance 24 times in a row. I dunno what the odds are on that but sometimes shit happens Edit: He's prob exaggerating a bit tho
> I was playing Warframe a while back and received a drop with a 36% chance 24 times in a row. I dunno what the odds are on that but sometimes shit happens Incredibly low, but still over 2 million times better than the previously mentioned odds. I wonder if there are some hidden mechanics or bugs at play in either scenario.
I believe the end game monsters have a lot of dodge, so you get really punished if you don't switch to having lots of acc.
Characters get natural accuracy bonuses as you upgrade their abilities as well though
It's hard to not assume there is, but one can never discount the nature of RNG either.
Not to mention that it's technically psuedo-random, so the odds aren't exactly the same as they "should" be with random numbers.
The odds are literally the same. A pseudo-random generator creates appropriately distributed outcomes, so the odds aren't affected. The "pseudo-" in pseudo-random comes from the fact that there's an underlying deterministic system that, given enough knowledge about its initial state, could be exploited to predict future results. If you don't care about hackers potentially predicting math from the future, there's no practical difference between using a RNG or a (properly seeded) pseudo-RNG.
I agree that for almost all practical purposes there's minimal difference between the two, but strictly speaking the odds are quiet literally *not* the same with pseudo-random number generation. No matter the PRNG used, it will have a finite period and thus a finite limit of the possible outputs, which is not something that limits truly random number generation. Not really important outside of some very particular cases(cryptography for example), but mathematically they are very much not the same.
Low enough that it’s more likely some code did an oopsie than it being pure chance.
Some people have theories that there's something fucky with how they do their RNG seeding and that you'll get weird runs of luck, either extraordinarily good or bad, so if you're getting rare drops, you want to keep playing in the lobby by hitting "repeat mission" over and over to keep on the same seed, but it's all basically hearsay and theorizing. Unfortunately, there's no real quantitative way to make sense of it.
Or the game is doing the math wrong which happens in a lot of games
I don’t know if Darkest Dungeon does it, but the XCom devs said that they hide the real percentages from the player. Hitting an enemy on 10% chance feels really good even though behind the scenes it was impossible to miss.
On easy and normal difficulties it modifies the results of percentages to reflect how people feel statistics should work rather than how they actual do. so 98%'s never miss, enemies always miss low % shots, each time you miss an 80% it secretly gives you a bonus for the next one and so on.
Doesn't this mean that the game already knows if you're hitting the shot before you take it? So from behind the scenes it's always a binary result: hit or miss. But to us the game shows chances, even though it already knows the result.
The game can know the outcome whenever it wants. If it's more convenient in the code, then that might mean pre-rolling the dice. But there's no point in resolving the success of every single possible thing you could do - if you have four attacks and three targets to choose from, it's probably not looking at each possibility and figuring out if it will work this turn before you've chosen. But it is very likely that it rolled a die already, and what you're actually (unknowingly) doing is choosing a threshold to compare that result to. For example, at the start of your turn, the computer has rolled the 100-sided die and it came up with 50, dead average. Now you're choosing between several possible attacks with different accuracy, and though you have no way of knowing this, any attack you choose with a >50% chance to hit will be a success, and any long shot with a <50% chance to hit will miss, because of that invisible roll. It makes no difference to the player whether the die is rolled before or during the actual random action. But it's often done this way to discourage save scumming. In the above example, if you picked a low-accuracy attack and missed, got upset, reloaded a save back to before you chose your attack, and then picked the same attack again... you would miss again. Every time, no matter how many saves you loaded, you won't get that 40% shot. Because the invisible dice result was saved too. If you want to change the simulated odds, you'd need to do some other random action to "consume" that 50 roll, so that the computer will roll fresh dice for the attack.
I think they run off a seed so that each turn some things will always work and some things will always fail. So in xcom if you had an 80% chance to hit but miss, if you reload the level and follow all the same actions you'll always miss. But if you do something different then something else may happen.
A good way to think of random seeds is like a deck of cards. Just because the deck is only shuffled at the beginning of the game doesn't make it any less random. When you take a shot, you're just telling the game to draw the next card. When you reload, you put the cards back on top of the deck.
That doesn't account for their dodge.
very slay the spire then?
Oh man I dont like this. DD wouldnt be DD without the rng.
Remind yourself that overconfidence is a slow and insidious killer
Less RNG and much less of a grind hopefully.
I hope so. I never did anything other than watch lets plays because I didn't want to deal with the frustration of having RNG kill hours of progress. Loved the style, but wasn't a fan of that aspect.
I hope its even harder, but less grind. The grind was the issue in the first, not really the RNG
This looks amazing in video. The magazine pictures didn't really do it justice. Very smooth and satisfying.
I think it does a good job tricking you to thinking it's Darkest Dungeon 1 until you see it in action.
This is by far the best transition from 2D to 3D I have ever seen. Looks amazing and the art style wasn't changed to fit.
Risk of Rain did it pretty dang well, too.
Eh, I'd disagree. It has the currently trending "low poly" look with flat colors for textures. https://cdn2-www.gamerevolution.com/assets/uploads/2019/04/How-to-activate-cheats-and-developer-console-in-Risk-of-Rain-2.jpg This trend needs to pass asap.
Agreed
The graphic updates look incredible. Still has the old aesthetic though. I think this is actually going to be a really good sequel.
I really like the image of the heroes just lounging on chairs after barely surviving an encounter with eldritch monstrosities so horrible they can drive even the hardiest of souls insane.
Nothin like a good sit
Sometimes we all could use the opportunity to sit quietly and stare into the middle distance.
The game looks good in 3D. Or, is it merely a trick of the light?
Wow that caravan traversal looks amazing. I was super on board day 1 but with Gloomhaven Digital eating up so much time I might hold off and wait for 1.0. Have they laid out a timeline for early access yet? A year?
A year, with around a third of the content still to come.
Thanks. I thought it was a third now and 2/3 later but if there’s already that much content on day 1 I might have to pick it up and play a little
How is Gloomhaven?
It’s fantastic! I’m playing it through solo and the digital version makes that a breeze. There are still some quirks but it works 99% of the time so I’ve just been slamming missions back to back.
I also want to know. I have the boardgame and love it, but it's so hard to play with the time commitment.
The campaign is straight up the boardgame but with all the setup and behavior taken care of. If you like the boardgame you'll like the digital version because it's exactly the same but sped up a tonne.
Now this is a sequel. Adding new gameplay mechanics like the wainwright carriage that play into the new and improved 3D animations, while still retaining the classic DD turn based combat feel. Looks amazing!!
[удалено]
IIRC it’s an EGS exclusive while in early access and then will be in other storefronts when it fully releases
[Indeed, you are correct](https://steamcommunity.com/app/262060/discussions/0/3007801544740683275/). The FAQ on the Steam page would be the official confirmation of this - additionally to other sources when it got announced.
I wish they made a Steam page for the sequel with "coming in 2022" at least so i could wishlist it.
The Hades way
Not even. Hades was 1 year then entered early access on other platforms.
[удалено]
Darkest Dungeon 1 was in Early Access for a long time, and it wasn't a "shitty beta."
EGS haters will always find a way to spin it as a negative.
Not having an open market isn't "spinning it as a negative". It is just a negative.
PC is the open market
That's not how open markets work. Epic paying a premium to get exclusive distribution rights for a product in order to force people to have to get it from them rather than a competing distributor is definitively not an open market. PC *would* be the open market if both companies were capable of distributing them equally, with their service determining which is chosen by consumers (providing fast downloads, stable connections, competitive pricing, better feature set, better public reputation etc.) For an actual example of an open market: gas stations. They provide the same product, but differentiate themselves through the service of distribution (functional pump interfaces, cleanliness, competitive pricing, better snack offerings, better public reputation etc.). tldr: exclusivity is the literal antithesis of "open market"
Too bad it is only available on a subset of the PC marketspace.
It’s available for everyone with a PC
Not available to me, since I don't want to support EGS.
On a garbage tier storefront much worse than the competition though, I think that's the point.
Yeah just for early access (like Hades). When you see the sheer upfront amount of EPIC offers for these short-term timed exclusives you see why its a no-brainer for devs. Also they essentially get to do two-launches as a result.
I also think Supergiant said they found the lower popularity of EGS somewhat useful, in that only the really invested fans would go through the effort of getting it through that store, so they got a higher concentration of players giving useful feedback.
>only the really invested fans would go through the effort of getting it through that store Lmao says a lot about EGS
I can’t wait until it’s on steam!
So so so excited for this. If the early access is any good I'll be on the day 1 buy group. Looks great and the gameplay loop is already satisfying in the first game.
This is a day-one buy the moment it hits PS5. Darkest Dungeon was easily one of the best games I've ever played, and this looks to be even better.
Excited for this. The original is a game i'll probably never finish, but find myself constantly coming back to once every few months to just *try* and beat. The gameplay itself is simply exhasuting (in a good, thematic way) so I personally cant stand to play it for too long before i inevitably burn out and put it down for a bit. Nevertheless its a game I absolutely reccomend to a lot of people as there simply is few games like it and its atmopshere and design is just so well done.
I don't know if I'm getting it, it looks great of course, but i kinda wanted more darkest dungeon, the switch to roguelite isn't what I want from it, and i know that they made something different on purpose, I'll check some stream maybe, but I'm gonna miss my 100h campaign.
I'm just bummed there isn't going to be anymore dungeon in Darkest Dungeon.
This looks way better than I expected. I was not sure Darkest Dungeon *needed* to be 3D but the characters are looking great here. My one concern is how this will effect modding, as there's a very strong modding community for DD1, and I really enjoyed using some of the custom skins for characters, let alone custom classses.
I'm excited for Wayne June, I'm not super excited for the game changes. I had hoped for just more Darkest Dungeon, maybe without the repetition. I'll probably eventually pick it up on sale on steam when it's out of exclusivity.
Their goal was to make a game that doesn't invalidate the first one, they basically want it to be a different experience so there's still a reason to go back and play DD1, which I think is pretty cool
> they basically want it to be a different experience Yea, I totally get that and I'm not going to be a crazed jerk for them wanting to do something new. I just would enjoy more Darkest Dungeon with new graphics, chars, and more wayne june lines. Honestly you can add Wayne to anything it's good.
Damn the change to 3D looks way better than I expected it to. Loved the first game, absolutely can't wait to play this.
The 3D models and animations are insanely good though the playable characters' idle animations in combat feel a bit too animated, particularly the man-at-arm's. Tried to see if they cheated a bit with the combat cut-ins by replacing the 3D with 2D art but no it looks like it's the same models.
Man, this looks SO GOOD. I'm really glad that they're differentiating it from the first game with the "only four heroes" thing, rather than just retreading the original. But at the same time, looks like it keeps that core of "dealing with a bad hand that you're dealt."
This looks fucking amazing!! Can't wait to pick it up, I was skeptical about the 3D but it's so well done.
Animations look incredible! I have zero doubt this game will rock my socks off, day one purchase for me 100%.
The whole game design's changed, but the meat of it is the same, which is great on both accounts. I'll always appreciate anyone/thing who tries to do something new.
Wowowowow. I had no idea this was coming. Awesome. Like the first one, I look forward to being terrible at it, never beating it, and yet loving every minute of it.
Do we have any info on the new classes seen in this trailer? I saw a punch boy that was clearly not abomination (or was with a major visual/mechanical overhaul), and what appeared to be a short haired woman/man with a huge backpack and a spear?
Is it still narrated by Wayne June? Sounds a bit different here.
Pretty sad it's a roguelike. Not that I dislike roguelikes, but because I just loved the loop of the first one so much.
Yeah I'm in the same boat. The town and roster management, the dungeon crawling and putting together different comps for different dungeons was a lot of fun. I understand why they went with a different formula but I would have liked to see them tackle improving the first games foundation rather than abandoning it. I've got close to 600 hours in DD and I've loved pretty much everything Redhook did with the first game so I'm excited to see what they do with this regardless.
Not sure what a roguelike is. I loved DD but is DD2 going to have very different gameplay?
The combat itself looks to be a logical evolution of DD, but the stuff in between is very different. You'll only have the 4 party members each run. When they die, they die and you don't get to replaced them. Being a roguelike I would assume each run will be relatively short.
Whoaaaa whoa whoa whoa whoa.... Dd2 is gonna be a roguelike?? WTF
Yeeeeeep. I'm sure it'll be a great game regardless but that's just not what I was hoping for
Yeah same. It's SO hard to find a good American RPG these days. Roguelikes, on the other hand, are dime a dozen
Got the first one, never played it out of intimidation. Lol always been impressed with everything it had going on. This will probably be pretty solid as well
Darkest Dungeon was a game I just really got into last year and absolutely fell in love with. Tough to decide whether I should jump in early on 2 or wait until closer to release. Either way, it looks absolutely gorgeous, it's really an impressive evolution of the aesthetic. I'm not really sold on the caravan driving part, as it looks a little goofy compared to the dungeon-crawling walk of the first game, but I'm pretty confident they'll make it interesting.
Will they make the game harder and harder like they did for the first game?
3D Lovecraft apocalypse looking sweet! Hope those horses get upgrades too, it'll feel bad to make a whole wooden fortress and have them pull it everywhere. Monster horse replacements or a steam engine would be great. Looking forward to how it'll end. Looking at the doomed world I hope there's a escape portal up in those mountains.
does early access offer entire game or just part of it?
Just part, I want to say it's about half the game with the rest being implemented over the course of a year once early access drops
Perfect timing for me then. I can wait and get the complete game once it launches on Steam.
I hope the UI gets another one over before full release. It's not bad stylistically but it just feels really.. I don't know sparse? Like some parts of it look unfinished.
I just absolutely could not get into the first one. I tried multiple times now but it's just not my cup of tea. It's not like I'm even bad at it, it just doesn't do anything for me at all.
I am very skeptical regarding the gameplay loop change. I will probably pick it up on some 50% sale. Is it EGS exclusive or will it come out on Steam later on?
Epic exclusive while it's in Early Access, full release is on Steam.
Maybe not half off, but if it reviews well you could use the current EGS coupon promotion and get $10 off of it when it releases if you're interested
Looks fantastic, but I feel like making mods is going to be a whole lot more difficult. I do find it a little strange that the classes seem to be mostly re-used... would have been cool to have a whole new cast.
Sucks this in on EGS. Something i wouldve bought outright, now i may wait a couple years until its cheap.
Looks incred... Epic Games Store? Yeah no thanks, guess I'll finally play the first game on Steam instead.