This game is now available on Steam!

Thanks for your help in getting this game selected for distribution via Steam. More information including a link to the Steam store page can be found below.

Greenlight is being retired. For more information on how to submit games to steam, refer to this blog post.
Dead State
JACKΞT❄ Mar 22, 2013 @ 12:49am
NPC or playable team mates
I don't know if I am the only one who dislikes that, but I think the game would get a better gameplay experience if the Vic NPC or any other "survivor team mate" was playable instead of just doing his/her own action randomly by him/herself.
It brings a lot more tactics into the game when you have to control a whole group in combat not just a single character while the NPC run around and furiously start hitting zombies.

Admittedly, in case there will be such a team control, it certainly then reminds of a Jagged Alliance or XCOM in a Zombie-Apocalypse, but isn't that a goal to achieve ?!

Despite this, I would rather want to see a fog of war likish thing, than just showing the complete map and let the zombies pop up all of the sudden. But that is probably just too early to criticize :)

Anyways, as one of the early backers, I am really looking forward to your game!
< >
Showing 1-15 of 17 comments
HandicapdHippo Mar 22, 2013 @ 1:19am 
This is one of the possible things they are considering adding post release as free dlc due to achieveing their kickstarter strech goals. From the kickstarter page

$260k - More cosmetic options for character creation.
-More zombie appearance variety (including an MMM, Bison! mascot)
– Post-release modifiers for fan requests like amount of food needed, effect of antibiotics, and ability to control allies.
This goal allows us to hire a character artist on full-time.
Flashback Mar 22, 2013 @ 1:58am 
matrixzoe, I can't get into details right now, but consider your wish granted =)
Chauden Mar 22, 2013 @ 10:55am 
Originally posted by Flashback:
matrixzoe, I can't get into details right now, but consider your wish granted =)

This post was interesting for sure. :P

But I must say that I kinda like both approaches, but for different reasons. Controlling your team is great from a strategic point of view - it can be very, very painful when one of your allies does something downright stupid (as every AI-controlled NPC does sooner o later). I have some sad memories of Fallout 1&2 about that.

On the other side of the coin, I kinda "like" the feeling that I have teammates who does their own thing. I don't want to use buzzwords like immersion and all, but it's the way I feel. Somehow when I don't control other characters besides the one I created, it's easier to identify myself with him.

I'm not saying that either way is better of worse, I loved the first 2 Fallouts as well as Jagged Alliance and Temple of Elemental Evil. Either way it can be a great game, but whatever they choose to do, it will be a different game, I guess.
BrokenNova54 Mar 22, 2013 @ 12:09pm 
I'd like to think that you play as one character, but if the character you play as dies, the screen will automatically let you control another character. This will go on until the group's all dead. At least, that's what I would like.
Jörmungandr Mar 22, 2013 @ 11:20pm 
both player controled buddies, or NPC would be fine. Just changes how you play, but either or would be fun. Glad you are on greenLight now :) Looking forward to see what happens
Shadow Mar 23, 2013 @ 12:47pm 
how about the choice to choose whether or not you can control them?
Ponto 2.25 Mar 23, 2013 @ 3:58pm 
I have to agree with Shadow, The choice to control NPC's or not makes everyone happy here and seems like an easier fix
NPC are playable to a certain point, if you ask them to do something they don't want to, they won't do it (cf DS's forum) For example if Brian's send Vic alone versus the three zombies at the diner, there's a high chance he refuse to go on it's own.
NonFactor Mar 24, 2013 @ 5:29pm 
I auctally enjoy having nonplayable companions/teammates.
Orange Avenger Mar 24, 2013 @ 8:39pm 
Now this might stray off topic but, Will there be multiplayer? or is it going to be just single player with the AI? Back on topic however i like shadow's idea most of all.
jack.norris Apr 3, 2013 @ 7:10pm 
An option to have both would be great. Since, depending on my mood, I'd be interested in both approaches.
Grognard_87 Apr 7, 2013 @ 4:05pm 
The ability to control the allies would be awesome. For one thing I always hated in both origonal and new xcoms where the characters panic or I lose control of them. You lose all tactics if you can't manuver the NPCs to help you in combat. Otherwise you might end up with that character running off after a looter, even though you know it's smarter to stay back and let him get away instead of lure you into a ambush, but the defective AI chases after him.

It's a must in a turn based and real time strategy game. Otherwise you lose your stategy if the person you perfer being at the back runs forward or if you're trying to be quite taking out a zombie but one of the NPCs decides to shoot off a round attracting a horde. Things like that will make you switch the game off and ask why the AI is so stupid. Not to mention then hate the game for making what should be a simple scavenging mission impossible because one or two members seem to be out to sabtage things. Easier to let the player have control with them than letting them do it themselves or give them programmed action like in FFXII.

Just my opinion really, but would be awesome if they could do that.
Sifer2 Apr 9, 2013 @ 8:25pm 
It's one of the things i'm a bit torn about myself so if there is an option that will be cool. From what I understand though the intended design is to make your relationship with your allies matter. As in if someone likes, and trusts you enough that will usually do what you tell them to. Otherwise if they are too scared, or don't like you they will do their own thing.

This is kind of interesting in that it creates a strategic dilemma for the player too. If your going on a high risk mission where some people might not make it back alive. Do you take your trusted allies along to try to minimize screw ups? Or do you take people you don't care about if they live?

I think it will end up being either really fun or really annoying. And having the option might help provide insurance in case it ends up being the latter.
The ally system has a lot potential to ♥♥♥♥ the game up. I really like WIAnde's approach where you have a good amount of control over your allies, but depending on your relations to them, they can refuse an order or even try to sabotage you.
Meaning, if s/o trusts/likes you enough, he/she will follow your orders blindly even if they seem irrational at first. Of course, if he/she gets hurt while following your orders, relations will go down.
On the other hand, if an ally doesn't trust/like you, they might do stupid actions like attracting zombies with their gun and trying to flee.

Could be really interesting that way!
Ubercat Apr 24, 2013 @ 1:05pm 
ok I agree with the devulpers with if someone likes you mostly that person will do what you tell them too but if that person hates you that person won't litsen to you

I think if you don't want somebody useing a gun to atract a hoard you a take away the persons gun and b give them a melle wep like a sledghammer

and with panic haters well if you don't like panic/think this will all be about the fighting/want to fight and don't want to try avoiding fighting/hate makeing hard dicissions/like non realalistic style of play
Last edited by Ubercat; Apr 24, 2013 @ 1:14pm
< >
Showing 1-15 of 17 comments
Per page: 15 30 50