48 Hours Left! Art Direction - What You Should Know
Two Days to Go!
I can't say it enough, so let me thank again all of our amazing backers for their contributions, not only monetary contributions, but for helping to champion us to their friends, and for your kind words.
We're at the 48 hour mark as I type this, and we've reached 168% of our original goal!
For those of you on the fence about upping your donation amount, keep in mind that after the gates close on donations, they can't be reopened, so if you want the t-shirt or closed beta access, (a new FAQ has been added regarding closed beta) now is the time to upgrade, and it's easy.
You Choose Our Direction
Something you may have heard us talking about has been the fact that we're allowing you, the backers to help shape the face of Aura Tactics. In particular, we want your input on what direction to take with the game in the immediate future. One thing I want to expand on here, is that not only does this include the art direction, but the general direction of the game as well.
Regardless of that direction, the game will remain a TRPG and we will still be dedicated to creating a deep, compelling TRPG experience. Multiplayer will also remain a core focus for us regardless of direction.
After the Kickstarter has closed, we'll be emailing you all with information about how to participate in our voting process (we'll be collecting other data as well) but I'd like to give you all specific details ahead of time, to get you thinking, and talking!
A: In Love with the Abstract
Visually this is the current style you can see in the version of our game shown on our project home page. Characters resemble chess pieces, and the art is decidedly abstract. While what we have currently shown is an indicator for the style, we will be polishing it up significantly if this style is chosen. Environments will be more varied, and themed, with more interesting decorations and color schemes.
As far as gameplay is concerned, choice A will feature a single player mode focused on challenges, with little in the way of narrative. If you have had the chance to play Metal Gear VR Missions this is the best possible corollary to what choice A represents. Multiplayer will of course, be a large focus.
B: Give me Fantasy or Give me Death
Visually, choice B represents the visual style shown in Update #6: Half Way Point Celebration. Characters conform to a traditional fantasy TRPG style, roughly three heads tall, the art style is heavily inspired by the work of the brilliant Akihiko Yoshida of Final Fantasy Tactics fame. This is significantly more costly as far as time and resources, and it will take much longer to create content.
In regards to gameplay, choice B will feature a narrative-driven single player mode that focuses on the world of Aura. (More information on this before the gates shut!) Multiplayer will of course still be a major focus for us, but this version will have significantly more options, and thus a longer development cycle.
C: I'll Have my Cake and Eat it too!
Choice C represents either ambivalence, or the desire for "all of the above." This would mean that we would deliver both A & B, releasing two separate games. The rewards would apply to game A, and game A would feature an abstract art style, with VR mission like challenges that hint at and reference game B.
Game B would be our chance to use tools that had been polished during the development of Game A to focus entirely on content creation, and bring you a fully featured, narrative driven single player experience, and more fleshed out multiplayer experience.
Relative to choice A, we would opt to focus slightly less on expansive single player content for game A, and slightly less variation and polish than if we exclusively set our focus on game A, however, the product would be by in large similar.
Relative to choice B, this means that the more expansive, narrative focused game would be pushed back further, but that it would most definitely benefit from polished tools and feedback from your experiences with game A. You would also have something in your hands earlier with game A, even if it's not a narrative driven experience.
874
Backers
$11,577
pledged of $5,000 goal
0
seconds to go
Funding period
Mar 7, 2012 -
Apr 6, 2012
(30 days)
- First created · 8 backed
- Douglas Miller 141 friends
- Website: designerdougm.com
Pledge $1 or more
16 backers
Your name will be in the credits and you will have a vote in the game's art direction.
Estimated delivery: May 2012Pledge $5 or more
625 backers
You will receive a free copy of the game at release, a free desktop background, and all lower reward tiers.
Estimated delivery: May 2012Pledge $15 or more
116 backers
An (appropriate) name of your choice will be added to the random name generator for characters, and all lower reward tiers.
Estimated delivery: May 2012Pledge $25 or more
90 backers
You will receive an Aura Tactics t-shirt, and all lower reward tiers.
Estimated delivery: Jun 2012Pledge $100 or more
16 backers
You will receive access to the closed beta, a special thanks in the credits and all previous reward tiers.
Estimated delivery: Jun 2012Pledge $250 or more
1 backer
You will receive an Aura Tactics t-shirt signed by the team, and all previous reward tiers.
Estimated delivery: Jun 2012Pledge $500 or more
3 backers Limited (7 of 10 left)
Awesome idea for a class? We'll collaborate with you on Skype to make your idea a reality in Aura Tactics, and all previous reward tiers.
Estimated delivery: Jun 2012Pledge $3,000 or more
0 backers Limited (2 of 2 left)
Really excited for Aura Tactics? We'll spend a weekend with you in person to discuss the game, hang out, and take in your feedback! (North America only, ask about exceptions.) Includes all previous reward tiers.
Estimated delivery: Jul 2012
Comments
Creator Leonardo Lee on April 18, 2012
C for sure
Creator Dylan Elliott on April 14, 2012
C
Creator Doctah Love on April 13, 2012
Id also say C. I am just excited to get started playing the game! The flexibility of the game and the potential for expansion and upgrades should also be shown via the art as well.
Creator Douglas Miller on April 12, 2012
We have plans to support all variations with updates, how frequent those be and what they will entail is up in the air.
Creator Omnifarious on April 12, 2012
I'm slightly more interested in A than C, but I'm not very interested in B. I think if you promised to release an update for A after the RPG is finished that added in a little more variation and polish to the single player game that I would definitely be for C over A.
Creator Hasardeur on April 12, 2012
C is definitely what you should be aiming for (I expect the top pick in the poll to be either be B or C), even though it'll be far more costly and time-consuming than option A. The current chess piece design just doesn't work for me outside of a tech-demo, I'm sorry to say.
Creator Peter S on April 5, 2012
Oh, on the subject of emoting - maybe the kind of emoting from Ragnarok 1, while low-tech, might work for this game? Check out this video for an example: http://www.youtube.com/watch…
Creator Peter S on April 5, 2012
I may have changed my mind ^_^;
Personally, I'm thinking David H had a good suggestion - the art from A, but the gameplay of B.
To elaborate: I would like to have a story with the game. But I see nothing wrong with having the characters be those abstract shapes - provided that we can easily distinguish between them. Unique characters would have to have their own shapes or distinguishing characteristics, I think.
Although...a story may require a certain amount of emoting from the characters that are involved. Are the abstract figures going to be able to emote effectively - that is, effectively enough to engage the players?
In short, I'd gladly choose the less resource-costly graphics option, if it means more gameplay - and the gameplay from option B is what I like ^_^
Creator Douglas Miller on April 5, 2012
@Ryan Thanks! Regardless of the choice the game will still be a TRPG, the primary differentiating factors are the art style and whether the single player is focused on narrative or not. If choice B or C win, we will be bringing on an actual concept artist hopefully, so you will all be able to stare at pictures far prettier than anything my bumbling designer hands could ever create!
Creator Ryan Murphy on April 5, 2012
Also thought I'd say, I actually really like the direction that art is going in the earlier update. Traditional, but with a cool twist, and those environment mockups actually remind me a bit of From Dusts art style, which I really liked.
Creator Ryan Murphy on April 5, 2012
I definitely vote for option B. I think you guys could make a great TRPG with these concepts, and I've been itching for a good one for a long time. Concentrating fully on making an extremely polished, great TRPG with fantasy elements is the way to go in my opinion!
Creator Douglas Miller on April 5, 2012
@Omnifarious The gameplay in all 3 options will remain traditional TRPG (Tactical RPG) gameplay, turn based, and set on a grid. So no need to worry there! The combat in Final Fantasy Tactics and other TRPGs is incredibly deep, and that depth in combat is incredibly important to us.
Creator Omnifarious on April 5, 2012
A or C. I would be really interested in a well-done single player game with the option to play skirmishes over the Internet. It'd be sort of like a limited fantasy version of SC 2. And it would give you a chance to really refine the balance and gameplay.
But I like the RPG idea, and would be interested in seeing that attention to detail in the combat system translated to an RPG. I kind of miss turn-based RPG combat that's a little more Ultima rather than Final Fantasy. I, in fact, am not very fond of Final Fantasy style as I think it's too simplistic.
But Final Fantasy style games do have nice art.
Creator Douglas Miller on April 5, 2012
@Nicholas Point taken, we'll keep this in mind if we go for option C. Though to be clear, there's going to be more than a few months lag time between the two, as we'll be building all the new art, writing the dialog, etc. But either way you have a good point, and we'll have to balance it against how much of a separate experience we want the two games to be. Either way I think some sort of bonus is in order for players who play game A if option C is chosen.
Creator Douglas Miller on April 5, 2012
@William Fantastic suggestion. I can't guarantee we can transfer your auracite levels directly 1:1 but some kind of transfer or bonus sounds like a great idea. We will defenitley keep that idea in mind for the future.
Creator William B on April 5, 2012
I agree with Nicholas. Could you do option C and let us transfer auracite levels, but not character levels, from game A to game B? I think I'd like to start with fresh characters for the narrative-focused game, but if I could keep my auracite levels from the original, I wouldn't feel like I wasted time by playing game A.
Creator --- (deleted) on April 5, 2012
I would cast my vote with B, as I was hoping A was just fast concept sketches to get the point across.
Creator Adam Simmons on April 5, 2012
I would have to vote for B since Final Fantasy Tactics is my favorite game of all time and would love something with a similar style, especially if you have a well-written narrative to go along with it.
Creator Nicholas Russell on April 5, 2012
After reading more replies I feel I should expand upon my answer. I too like the art style of option A and would be cool with it being in this game. My main concern is very much akin to how they treated MGS4 on the iPhone. Sure you had a fun game with a series of challenge based levels but it still felt gimped when compared to its bigger brother since that added a heavier story element and just generally more gameplay. I just don't want to play this game on day one knowing it, by design, will be obselete in a few months when the real Aura Tactics, complete with story and other refinements, is released. Especially since we still don't know if our auracite and character levels from the first game will transfer between the two or not. I know I'll probably invest a lot of my free time into it when Aura Tactics releases and would hate to have to start from square one after reaching level fifty just because I can't transfer my progress to the newer title, despite it not essentially being a sequel and in production essentially at the same time as the first game.
Creator Alek Dembowski on April 5, 2012
I like A personally but won't be sad if A doesn't win. :)
Creator Trevor Fraser on April 5, 2012
I'm pretty happy however it ends up, in large part because the mechanics will still be the same. Even so, I look forward to seeing what ideas people come up with. It's the great Marketplace of Ideas.
Creator Douglas Miller on April 5, 2012
@Martin I apologize if there was any confusion regarding this topic! We did try to make it clear that our backers would have an input into the style of the game. If you feel strongly about style A let us know why and maybe others will agree with you! And to clarify incase there was any concern, deep asynchronou, cross platform multiplayer is a focus for us no matter what. If your primary concern is multiplayer, this choice is purely cosmetic.
Creator Martin Coxall on April 5, 2012
I donated on the assumption it would be A.
Creator Douglas Miller on April 5, 2012
After the Kickstarter has closed, we'll be emailing you all with information about how to participate in our voting process.
Creator Scott Aldridge on April 5, 2012
How do I vote?
Creator Ryan Clingman on April 5, 2012
I think option B sounds like the preferable route to me.
Creator Douglas Miller on April 4, 2012
@Peter Thanks for your feedback! We want opinions like yours, and that's why we're letting you guys decide! A bit of a clarification though, although game A is equated in my description to Metal Gear's VR Missions, it's still very much a TRPG. Your characters will progress, you'll be swapping and leveling classes, using unique spells and abilities etc. The primary difference is in art style, focus on narrative vs. challenge based gameplay in the single player segment. And on the note of graphics, we're not going to put out anything we're not proud of, I am a polish freak! So while we certainly will take steps to reduce the amount of turnaround time each asset requires even in game B, we won't sacrifice artistic quality.
This is why we're offering the choice between A, B and C. There's no way to make B less time consuming than A, it's just not possible. Also, some people actually dig the abstract style! Keep the discussion coming guys, we'll be holding the vote once the Kickstarter closes, but we love to hear everyone's reasoning!
Creator Peter S on April 4, 2012
Yeah, C seems smart. It's a way to raise funds for the TRPG game, not to mention feedback and development experience ^_^
However! It seems like deep down, people prefer option B - and see option C as a way to get a better (but delayed) TRPG. I'm thinking: how important are time-consuming graphics? Is there a way to have graphics that are both appealing to the users, and fairly easy to design?
So, I'm going to vote for B. Sure, making game A first will make a later TRPG better...but making game B first, will make a second TRPG all the more refined in the TRPG department.
What do people think about this reasoning?
Creator BillD4 on April 4, 2012
I vote for C.
Creator Nicholas Russell on April 4, 2012
My vote would have to be B but might I up the ante by suggesting later on, after the game has been out for a few months or a year, you release a vr missions style single player expansion pack. Maybe add a few fan requested multiplayer additions for good measure. I for one don't mind waiting a while before getting my hands on this title and it seems beta testing a finished product is better than buying a glorified tech demo, as A essentially is when compared to B. Besides, the biggest problem you'll face after release later on is how to keep people interested. Having a set of training missions planned for later on, featuring iterative content based on months of previous player feedback, is something I definitely would love to see
Creator Dean Pritchett on April 4, 2012
I'm all about B, but if C gets me a better B and a version of the game earlier to ease my TRPG hunger then C it is!
Creator Douglas Miller on April 4, 2012
@David Thanks for the input! I'll hold off on discussing potential narrative and world settings for now, but look for a discussion of that nature in the near future. I just finished an interview, and part of that interview was regarding narrative, so I'll post that as well as more information here once it's released!
I'll also keep in mind your feedback about narrative in choice A, and we'll definitely gather more feedback after donations have closed!
Creator Douglas Miller on April 4, 2012
@Peter And it shall! While the answer to the vote on this question (which will be sent to each backer via email after donations close) will inform our decision on the style of the game, multiplayer remains a strong focus for us no matter what!
Creator David Heyes on April 4, 2012
You could do a simpler visual style, as in type A, with cut scenes and discussions. Imagine something like the gods moving mortals on a board, and then after each challenge we see how the story plays out or something. Anyway, just my two cents from a very low dollar value backer.
Creator David Heyes on April 4, 2012
I've already given some feedback on the comments section so I'll respond to what was asked there. Personally I've spent my fantasy loving life awash in the Anglo-franco version of fantasy. There's so much more of the world's various fantasy imagery and story than just medieval England and France.
How about North Africa, the various Egyptian dynasties, Persia, Babylon, Judea, Heian-Era Japan, Maya, Aztec, Inca, India, Cambodia, Thailand... You see what I'm getting at here?
Never the less What I mean by Visual style A is that a more abstract set theme of images and settings is what I would like to see, but yet retain the storytelling rpg mode of style B.
Let's not just rehash Tolkien, D&D, Final Fantasy (ad nasuem), Elf Quest, and Insert-Generic-Fantasy-Trope here.
Creator Elliot Hiroshige on April 4, 2012
C
Creator Jared Taylor on April 4, 2012
I prefer style B, or C as its more game altogether :p However if the gameplay mechanics are there then its not too big of an issue to me. I value gameplay over graphics anytime.
Creator Ralph Mazza on April 4, 2012
C
Creator Brandon Olson on April 4, 2012
B! :)
Creator Peter James Davidowicz on April 4, 2012
The reason I backed Aura Tactics is for tactical multiplayer. It makes sense to have skill training challenge missions to introduce mechanics and allow the player to hone their skill, but I feel the bulk of your effort should be spent on refining and releasing a challenging multiplayer experience.
Should your multiplayer release succeed, I would love to see additional content and possibly even a full-fledged single-player campaign, as well as a refined art style.
Creator Mocharaid on April 4, 2012
I choose C :)
Creator Sean Riedinger on April 4, 2012
Option B or C here- I would prefer B, but I understand the kind of restrictions that can apply to the process.
Creator crackpotTheorist on April 4, 2012
C seems like the obvious option here. I personally, would love a nice, polished game to play with friends, with a dozen or more solo challenge maps for myself, to hold me over while you make a nice, story driven RPG.
Although I prefer option B, It would be nice to have a bit more then the current prototype to play with, and to have fun with, and the chess style lends better to pure gameplay with less focus on story.