Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ghazkull]

Okay after reading what you folks said and looking at what i found in game, and especially the evidence you turn up in a certain quest i have the following theory:

Graven Ashe WAS an awesome General and The Voices were a Spymaster the likes which makes the Spider shit his pants. However over the years they turned more and more towards their Archon Powers because why wouldn't you?

Why devise a complex strategy and outsmart your enemies  and so forth when you can insta heal your soldiers from a hundred miles behidn the front and just let them dumbly storm against enemy walls till they break down?

WHy do clever intrigue and itnerrogation, subversiveness and torture when you can simply absorb the souls of your prisoners and instantly know everything about htem?

I think the two Archons simply tripped over their own power, relying on them all the time let to them becoming blunt and useless...

Also im starting to really feel like just getting them all killed by Tunon to get rid of these fools.

[Mithras]

Yeah, I had a moment after averting the edict where I seriously wished I could have gone back to the beginning, sleep for 8 days and 'win' be scouring Kyro's earth of the idiots I was working with. But alas, I don't have the time for that play through at the moment.

[Taricus]

There's actually a fairly good reason why the two seems so incompetent, though those are spoilers. Needless to say there's more than just incompetence at play.

[somemildmanneredidiot]

There's actually a fairly good reason why the two seems so incompetent, though those are spoilers. Needless to say there's more than just incompetence at play.

Share in spoilers for those of us unable to play pls

[Neonivek]

There's actually a fairly good reason why the two seems so incompetent, though those are spoilers. Needless to say there's more than just incompetence at play.

Share in spoilers for those of us unable to play pls

They hate eachother personally... there you go

[JumpingJack]

There's actually a fairly good reason why the two seems so incompetent, though those are spoilers. Needless to say there's more than just incompetence at play.

Share in spoilers for those of us unable to play pls

They hate eachother personally... there you go

Now that's just silly.

Here's a link to the spoiler in question. Trigger warning. May be NSFW. Blah blah blah.

[Neonivek]

Yes we mentioned this spoiler earlier.

Still boils down to them hating eachother.

[Retropunch]

As the reddit page points out - this major plot point is seemingly hidden away and poorly exposed.

It's my whole problem with the game - really interesting flavour, hidden behind useless direction.

[Uristides]

I wasn't quite sure whether I should necro this or just leave a note on the small blurb thread, but I think sparking interest in this game again could be nice. Just finished my first playthrough, fancied my character more as a diehard Tunon loyalist, and ended up allying with the Disfavoured path because they were the more lawful of the two for the most part. Very fun, if kinda short and rushed out, experience overall. Some general remarks:

• This is no news but difficulty is kinda wonky. I set the game to easy on Act 1 because I was having trouble with some battles. By the time I was halfway into Act 2 I was absolutely facerolling everybody. Getting used to the game mechanics played a part, but I think having a full party and the crazy way magic users scale was more impactful overall. Nevertheless I ended up sticking with the low difficulty because by that time I was more interested in finishing the story than enjoying the combat experience.
• One thing I really disliked, and I think it's one of the reasons I think I struggled in Act 1, were the consumables. I have severe inventory anxiety, so when I saw an item that gave me +2 Might or whatever for 10 minutes I just felt like holding onto it. I didn't know if it was exceptionally powerful, or if it was going to be scarce throughout the game, why waste it so early on? Same with camping supplies. Finished my campaign barely resting and besides potions I only touched consumables on a couple of bossfights
• The looting system feels... eh. On one hand I was trying to roleplay lawful guy, on the other hand not running around plundering every unattended chest and crate from people's homes felt like a huge disavantage, and the world was largely indifferent to me doing it as well. The pixel hunting aspect also felt distinctively awful sometimes.
• Magic is so powerful and fun that it feels bad playing anything other than a spellcaster, even if it's only a handful of utility spells to complement your skull-bashing kit.
• I found it nice how most of my foes were humans, anything else would feel like a detour from the political struggle as the main focus of the game, I feel. Also because humans are nice to fight against and the few non-human races in the setting were rather lame. I couldn't quite relate to Beastmen and the Bane were really underdeveloped.
• Not being able to betray your alliance in the Stone Sea after the Disfavoured disclose their plans was a massive bummer. You get two chances to do it in other random moments, but not when it really matters most.
• The most effective Disfavoured battle plan is to sit back and "wait for reinforcements" while I mop up the floor with the enemies and then coming around to celebrate "our" victory.
• Ashe and the Disfavoured are pretty much the same thing, agreeing with one is agreeing with the other and so on. Your average Chorusman, on the other hand, couldn't be farther from Nerat. Most of the former are just deranged thugs living the moment, while the latter is one cunning sick fuck. Like Gork and Mork, if you will. I find this difference rather clever on the part of the writers, and realizing it is why I decided to make my second character Anarchist instead of Chorus, as I had originally planned

Also, Mandalore recently released a review of the game, for those still on the fence about it.

[Cathar]

I played Tyranny to completion, and I do not recommend it. It's a gimmicky baldurs whose gimmick is not given any real importance.
It sells itself as a game of hard choices and ethical dilemnas, but I could always either law-fu or brute force my way out of any ethically challenging situation, or there was a clear good choice.
When I started it, I assumed it would be exploring the themes of evil in a milgram/game theory fashion, where the context and the rules make evil the winning move in most situation, and where the player is driven to evil by a setting favorising evil regardless of personally held morale values. When I finished it it felt like an isometric fable 3.

This game was really disapointing.

[Iduno]

I played Tyranny to completion, and I do not recommend it. It's a gimmicky baldurs whose gimmick is not given any real importance.
It sells itself as a game of hard choices and ethical dilemnas, but I could always either law-fu or brute force my way out of any ethically challenging situation, or there was a clear good choice.
When I started it, I assumed it would be exploring the themes of evil in a milgram/game theory fashion, where the context and the rules make evil the winning move in most situation, and where the player is driven to evil by a setting favorising evil regardless of personally held morale values. When I finished it it felt like an isometric fable 3.

This game was really disapointing.

I felt similarly. I'm not a big fan of Paradox's style of mashing together lots of tiny hidden bonuses and hoping it works out for you. Having non-numeric descriptions for some things didn't help that, because I couldn't even make an attempt at figuring out which made more sense for my character.

[ChairmanPoo]

I think it´s a pretty cool game. TBH my biggest problem with the system is that magic is so good that it doesnt make sense not to make characters at least hybrids, and to organize things so that you have one or two tanks and the others as full mages to rain artillery on your enemies.

The story is good enough. Forget about multiple endings etc, which is all fine and dandy, but plain truth is that pretty much every RPG, no matter how much pretense of multiple different endings it has... by content constraints one path will always be better fleshed out than others. The more different the endings, the bigger the difference in fleshness will feel. They dont feel as naturally fluid, so to speak. So I´m not too concerned about that; it´s all well and good to have agency, but by and large I take the plot much as I would do in a movie or a book, and I´m not really interested in doing it all over again just to see what happens if I make choices that dont feel either fluid or right.

From this POV, I think Tyranny´s "main" plot, (AKA: the one in which you´re kind of leading a zeroth law rebellion against Sauron) is pretty good and interesting. The other paths, eh, felt less organic, tbh. And anarchist feels like a munchkin gimmick, to me...

All in all I liked it, just like I liked Pillars of Eternity. They´re not PS:T plotwise, but they´re interesting enough, and fleshed enough, and the settings are original enough to raise your curiosity...

[AlStar]

My overall opinion of this game was very positive. The feel of the world, the power of magic, the various moral quandaries that you're given - all very well done, in my opinion.

Unfortunately, you could definitely feel that the dev team ran out of time / resources. The first towers are their own dungeons that you need to dive through before you take them over. The last couple? Literally a single room.

I think that the game has an amazing magic system - both to it's benefit and to its bane. Why? Because, as a number of others have mentioned, being able to twist the very fabric of the universe to your will is rather more powerful than swinging a bar of sharpened steel; and I think this game shows that to devastating effect - if you're not a hastened, regenerating demigod hurling bolts of ice/fire at your enemies, you're pretty much intentionally handicapping yourself.

I'd say that my only major complaint with the game was the ending - I was expecting a final boss, and went out of my way to gear up as such... and was left disappointed.

[Uristides]

I played Tyranny to completion, and I do not recommend it. It's a gimmicky baldurs whose gimmick is not given any real importance.
It sells itself as a game of hard choices and ethical dilemnas, but I could always either law-fu or brute force my way out of any ethically challenging situation, or there was a clear good choice.
When I started it, I assumed it would be exploring the themes of evil in a milgram/game theory fashion, where the context and the rules make evil the winning move in most situation, and where the player is driven to evil by a setting favorising evil regardless of personally held morale values. When I finished it it felt like an isometric fable 3.

This game was really disapointing.

I was pretty satisfied with what I got out of it tbh, but I can understand that it didn't fulfill your expectations since the devs sold the gimmick just as "your typical fantasy RPG fanfare, only the evil guy has already won", which left a lot open to the imagination.

The law-fu was actually one of my favorite parts of it. I'm not too well-versed in CRPGs but most I played would soft-lock you on a "good boy -- evil prick" axis, with just a bit of nuance here and there. I felt since Tyranny puts you in a frame where the actual law and underlying ethics are quite draconian, playing a lawful character was made much more interesting. Most of my first playthrough I went with fairly straightforward, literal, interpretations of the law, which in most other games would land you straight into "good boy" territory. This time however, I ended up depriving a lot of hard-working folks of their goods or straight up sentencing them to death just because it's what made sense according to the law. It's the sort of lawful evil gameplay that I found hard to reproduce in other games, where you're mostly carrying out evil deeds because they benefit you or just because you're a giant prick, not out of selfless love for law and justice in the pursuit of a harmonious society.