The Road Not Taken script

Script	On-screen extra blurbs	Links, References and Additional notes
Library of Ruina is an auto-battler. At least, it was, early in development.		[ Library Of Ruina ] String Theocracy Library of Ruina (Steam) [ Library of Ruina ] - Alpha version Battle Video
Hi, I'm Zero, and in this video we'll take a look at Library of Ruina's combat system and how it eventually turned into one of the most unique takes on Turn-Based Combat out there right now. Note that I'll only be giving an overview of the system, refer to my other videos for the details.	Link to full script including all references (eg. video sources) in the Description
I'll also be using more generic terminology as much as possible. To make up for the lack of detail, I've added a couple of extras - a bit about the sequel, Limbus Company, and some thoughts about game development.	Generic instead of In-Game Terms: "Deck" instead of "Bookshelf" "Card" instead of "Page" and so on...
In the Beginning
In order to properly explain how we got here, we must first go back to the beginning, after the full launch of the prequel, Lobotomy Corporation. Now this isn't much of a spoiler as we're already at the 3rd game in the franchise, but LobCorp ends with a very big sequel hook. And so the devs immediately began work on that sequel. Since LobCorp leaned more towards management, it was decided early on that this new game would be more action oriented. The Director mentioned in an interview that he wanted it to be like Uncharted Waters 4, a game whose combat was mostly hands-off and was fun to watch.		Lobotomy Corporation (Steam) LoR crowdfunding Interview 【5/20発売】『大航海時代IV with パワーアップキット HD Version』PV
This lead to the initial pre-Alpha prototype, an Auto-Battler. From the footage they uploaded to their YouTube channel, this prototype does seem to get the “fun to watch” part right. But you can guess what the team thought about it: it's mobile game-y and doesn't have enough gameplay elements. To address these glaring issues, they started adding more stuff for the player to do, starting with the cards.		Do ProjectMoon Dream of Auto Battle Simulation Game?
The usual (Card Game) stuff
Despite the first line fakeout of this video, I'm sure many viewers who are only vaguely aware of what this game is about still know that this is a card game, whether through quick glimpses of gameplay, or just paying attention to the intro. So let's go with that first, pushing away all the freaky game mechanics to the side for now, and skip straight to the final game and talk about card game stuff that should be familiar to a modern indie gamer.	Lobotomy Corporation Retail Release - April 2018 Library of Ruina Early Access - May 2020 Library of Ruina Retail Release - August 2021 Prototype - initial Auto-Battler Prototype - Cards added Release
On the surface, there's a lot of overlap with your usual collectible card games like Magic: the Gathering. You get to build a deck for each of your units, which they then get to draw from in combat.
Each card has a resource cost, and each unit has limited resources available in order to play their cards. As you might expect, this setup leads to usual card game concepts like mana curves. There's also a booster pack mechanic, which is a bit controversial for this kind of game.	Light cost on the top-left corner of a Card Lights above units tell you how many they currently have
Oh and yeah, since it's a single player game, you get to have an idea what the enemies are going to do next.	Similar to Slay the Spire's Intent system	Slay the Spire (Steam)
And that's basically the extent of familiar card game elements in Ruina's combat system. Remember, this game wasn't a card game from the start. By having roots in Auto-Battlers, this let the devs experiment with stuff you don't typically see in card games. And oh boy did Project Moon try out some crazy stuff...
Changing the Way Units Deal Damage
You can already see one of those experiments in the initial prototype take note how these two are fighting but aren't taking any damage. There's just a counter going up. If we rewind a bit, we can see them acting like in a normal Auto-Battler. That is, both attack and take damage. But have you stopped to think why, why do we consider this normal? Just taking damage and not doing anything about it? One could say that it's actually realistic, if you get stabbed or shot, you get stabbed or shot. But we're talking about games here, surely, there are more fun and engaging ways to depict combat.		Battlefield V – War in the Pacific Official Trailer
Ultimately, this is a relic from video game's history: many of our games have their roots from tabletop games. And since they predate handheld computers, their combat systems have to be as simple as possible while still trying to simulate potentially complicated situations.	The on screen blurbs don't really matter, the important parts are seeing the IRL movement of miniatures and rolling of the dice in the first video, and the Pathfinder 2e calculations in the second.	A Quick History of Wargames Pathfinder 2e Combat in 7 Minutes or Less
Those systems were simplified further once they became video games, this time due to screen and input limitations. And this system of attacking and dealing damage just stuck… through the decades.		Kyūyaku Megami Tensei I (SFC remake of MT1) Shin Megami Tensei III: Nocturne HD Remaster Shin Megami Tensei V
There have been innovations, but when you think about it, they're mostly just ways to take out enemies faster; the core is still there - one side attacks, other side gets hit.		Persona 4 Golden
However, if we look at other media, there's another fun and engaging way to represent combat... Two opposing forces parrying each other's blows until one side overpowers the other. In short, Clashing		JoJo’s Bizarre Adventure: All-Star Battle R – Announcement Trailer DRAGON BALL: Sparking! ZERO – Goku VS Vegeta - Rivals Trailer [BUDOKAI TENKAICHI Series]
And that's what Library of Ruina has settled on as its preferred combat style, all the way to the release. And while you can still choose to tank damage, or find ways to attack without Clashing, most of the game will revolve around setting up the right Clashes for your team. I'm not a game design essayist so I won't dwell on this game-changing paradigm shift for long. If you want to know more, again, link in the description for a guide. I will however, discuss something Clash-related that I don't talk about in that other video…		A Spoiler-Free Guide to Library of Ruina
Removing a Role
Namely, your units don't take as much damage as they would in a normal turn-based game. I mean, what do you expect when your units don't just stand around like dumb-asses taking damage.	Only 2 damage taken after 5 turns
Less damage leads to a bigger side-effect: Your teams no longer need dedicated healers. No, not in the usual “you wiped out the enemy before they can hurt your party” sort of deal. I'm talking about long, drawn out battles without any healers. Stop and think about it for a moment: How would party-based combat look like without healers? For one, more time spent on attacking. Gone are the “ok we need to stop attacking this turn and heal up unless we want to die.” We can also replace the dedicated healing abilities with passive effects like Regeneration, or to be more in line with our constant Clashing, triggered effects like Lifesteal. They don't even need to be that strong, what would be a joke in other games can be perfectly viable means of sustaining your team just because they don't take as much damage. This results in another interesting side-effect: when your units do take a lot of damage, battles suddenly become a lot more tense as we removed all those dedicated healing abilities, including revives. I could go on, but I think you got the point. Change something as fundamental as damage dealing, and lots of things will change down the line. And that's gonna be an ongoing theme as we continue this video.		Footage from Persona 4 Golden
Adding Another Dimension to Combat
Getting back on track... let's return to the Alpha build and see how they originally implemented the card game mechanics. Each turn you get to assign a card to each unit, with each card adding a number of pips to the unit's queue. Each pip represents an attack, or more accurately, a potential Clash.	"action queue" "pip" is a term I made up
Then at the start of every following turn, the pips are refreshed and you get to assign a new card to the queue, which again adds other pips.	Turn 1 Card with 3 actions Turn 2 Card with 3 more actions to add to the queue
This way of playing cards does look odd though it does make a bit more sense in an Auto-Battler sense where multiple actions are expected in the “auto” part of the battle. But some of you may have remembered from earlier - Library of Ruina uses the more familiar resource-based system for playing cards. And in other games of the sort, you could just do the multiple actions part by playing multiple cards as long as you have resources to do so. So, did they switch to this approach?	Cards aren't free to play Resources Available
By the pre-Beta, the answer to that is yes and no. Yes, in the sense that they ditched the part where cards you played in earlier turns stick around. But also “no” because the rest remained mostly intact - you can only play one card per turn (though later on you units can gain multiple slots effectively letting you play more). And more importantly, each card still consists of multiple pips, though now they've become Dice.	Previously played Cards 3 6-sided dice	[ Library of Ruina ] Battle Video No, I didn't cover how the standard regular polyhedral dice (d4, d6, d8, d12) were replaced a few weeks into early access by generic "dice" and "range".
As if Clashing wasn't radical enough, the devs decided that single actions weren't fun enough, instead taking a cue from fighting and stylish action games and turned combos into a key part of combat.		TEKKEN 8 – Steve Fox Reveal & Gameplay Trailer Devil May Cry 5 - Final Trailer (4K full ver.)
Now you might say, this isn't breaking new ground; lots of cards in other games do multiple things.	One Card, 2 Effects
However, what's different here is that each Die is treated as a separate discrete entity within the queue.	Dice are treated as separate entities eg. they can have different effects "On Win: Weaken foe's next die" "On Win: Destroy foe's remaining die" no effects for this Die	Most of the Korean text in this video were translated using Google Translate
Or in bigger picture terms, you aren't playing cards against each other you're pitting the Dice queues.	So it's better to treat Clashes as "Dice Queue vs Dice Queue" rather than the usual "Card vs Card"
The best way to show this in action is to look the Evade Dice.	Early Access Preview - switch to Dice
Most of the other dice work on the concept of “who rolls highest wins, then we move to the next dice”, but Evade is special. If an Evade wins against attacks, not only does the evader not take any damage, the Die is reused, allowing the same Die to dodge multiple attacks.	1st use of 1st Evade Die in queue 2nd use of 1st Evade Die (reused) take note of the unused 2nd Evade Die
Evade is also a Defensive Die, which means in certain situations, it can be used to defend an incoming attack from a different enemy.	2nd Evade Die (unused) retained for future attacks retained 2nd Evade Die
These reinforce the fact that ultimately, it's the dice queues that matter, and that the cards are simply vessels for the dice. Anyway, it's time to move on again, so yeah - if you want to know more, details on the other video.	* Cards still matter (eg. drawing, cost, card-level effects) but when it comes to combat, the dice and queue matter more
Letting the Player Control the Flow of Combat
For the next update, try to forget what you saw about the pre-Beta and let's return to Alpha yet again… At this point, the devs have added more gameplay since the early prototype. On top of our Clashes, we got our cards, our action queue… but we really haven't solved the main problem with the prototype: it still doesn't feel like the player has that much control over the combat. To be fair, there's already a bit of player choice here if you look closely: units will Clash with the one in front of them so it's all about choosing the right cards to counter the enemy. You could still up the player input though.
For example, other Auto-Battlers let you position your units before the battle, with those close to the front tanking most of the damage. Maybe the devs tried that approach, but unfortunately we don't have any footage of that. Instead, we have hints that they tried the opposite: that is, you can't reposition your team. What could change are their Speed values.		Despot's Game: Dystopian Battle Simulator
As you might guess higher Speed means faster, and faster units will reach the enemies first and start clashing with them.	Sometime before Early Access? * removed background to emphasize that what I'm talking about in this section are my own speculations about an earlier build ie. how the Speed mechanic started
Then you could just have equipment to upgrade their Speed, or cards to change them on the fly.	Equipment and Effects (not just Speed related) probably go here Next Turn Speed +2
At first glance, it looks like a step forward from the usual pre-wave positioning but compared to the previous version, it's almost a step back. At least in the Alpha you have an idea who's attacking who and you can play cards accordingly, with this setup you're guessing who's going to end up meeting in the middle first.	Changed the movement scheme from "Attack enemy directly in front of you" to "Attack closest enemy" (same end result, but slightly more clumped)	I hoped my example would show a different result, but alas, it didn't.
Alright, I know you didn't forget what you just saw a few minutes ago so you already know how they addressed this problem: by adding a targeting system. Instead of just seeing the enemy's intent, you can also see their targets. They then dialed back on the weirdness with the whole playing cards on your units thing, and went to the more traditional approach of playing cards to target the enemies. Everything we talked about so far stays the same. Playing a card as a response to an incoming attack will end up becoming a Clash. Then there's the Dice queue which you already saw in action earlier.
They did, however, give Speed an updated purpose. Faster units can now intercept an attack meant for other units. In other games, interception may just be a nice-to-have gimmick, but in a Clash-focused game, it's almost essential. Without it, the game would be back to the Alpha where you could only respond to incoming attacks and can't choose your units' targets.	4 > 2, can intercept attack	Atlus USA Announcement Trailer: Persona 4
With enough fast units, it almost feels like a tactical game where you can position your units in front of enemies, limiting their attacking options, and overall effectively changing the flow of combat.		Disgaea (Steam version)
In practice, however, the tactical analogy fails quickly. For example, when there's a unit under attack by more than 2 enemies at once.	* using Early Access footage here as this problem isn't present in the pre-Early Access video	Footage recorded on 2020-06-26, over a month after start of EA.
This can happen when you don't have enough fast units to balance the clashes, or one team having more members than the other, both of which are fairly common.	Targeted by 2 enemies (1 Clash, 1 one-sided) Also targeted by 2 enemies (1 Clash, 1 one-sided)
In this situation, it can be hard to predict which of the attacks will take place first.	Will Roland be able to soften the middle enemy before the Clash with Gabriella?
And as you can see there's yet another complicating factor: Knockbacks.	Yes, but only because Gabriella was knocked back by a previous attack Gabriella was originally closer Roland is now much closer
Long story short, you can't be tactical if you can't reliably figure out the action order. Tactical problems aside, the addition of Speed and Interception is still a big deal as we've finally got away from the very passive gameplay of the earlier builds.
The Patch that Changed the Game
A few months into the Early Access, the devs dropped this simple change in the patch notes. Characters with lower Speed values will always wait for the characters with higher Speed values to play out their actions before taking their turn even if they arrive at their targets first.
I admit, I'm one of the many players who didn't really understand what this meant. Looking back, however, this may just be the most important change to the combat system during Early Access. On the surface, all this does is cause some weird UI thing where everything stops except for the fastest unit who then slides towards their target.	Note how they meet but no Clash Slower (3 Spd) still waiting for their turn while Yesod (4 Spd) slides to cut in.
But let's cut to the chase - remember what I said a minute ago that we can't make tactical decisions unless we can reliably predict the action order?	Will Roland reach his target first? Pre-patch, it depends on the Clash outcome. ie. if Gabriella loses, Roland my reach first because of the knockback.	This one's a typo, it's a one-sided attack, so instead of Gabriella losing, it's about how much knockback is applied.
Yeah, this patch basically gives the player that. If previously we can't tell if Roland will attack first, now we know because his Speed is lower. Even with the knockback, he'll have to wait for his turn because of the patch.	Will Roland reach his target first? Post-patch, we can tell by their Speed i.e. definitely NO. (Roland is slower at 2 Spd vs 3 Spd)
Of course, this change is more complicated than it looks, but overall, it's just a matter of getting the hang of how things work, and once you do, you should have no problem tactically maneuvering your team through the battlefield.	i.e. almost* definitely NO. (Roland is slower at 2 Spd vs 3 Spd) * if the 4 Speed enemy staggers (or kills) Gabriella, Roland may reach the target "first".
You'd be able to set pre-Clash flanking maneuvers from units that attack first.	The "assigned Clash" is the yellow arrows, and it means what it means. "pre-Clash flanker" are one sided attacks from units faster than the assigned Clash, and will attack the target first
Conversely, you can also set post-Clash follow-ups or finishers. This is a complicated topic so again I'll leave the rest of the details to my other video.	"post-Clash follow-up/finisher" are one sided attacks from units slower than the assigned Clash, and will attack the target after the Clash
The gameplay shift comes at a cost, however. By prioritizing the Speed mechanic over the unit positions on the battlefield, the devs have essentially abandoned most of what makes an Auto-Battler an Auto-Battler. The only thing that remains is the hands-off battle processing.	Mid-Early Access - prioritize Speed over position
Some parts like unit positions survive for other purpose but all that effort implementing the other Auto-Battler elements is now wasted.	Battlefield layout used to be more important (closer units can be tanks), but is now mostly cosmetic aside from the ocassional[sic] tiebreaker. * field is just squished, no fancy perspective projection here	Yes, the top units are in fact 1 unit closer to the center than the bottom units.
Then again, that's just part of the creative process, discarding stuff because you choose to go a certain route. And with this patch, Project Moon has decided to turn Library of Ruina into a Turn-Based Tactics game.
A (rather long) digression on Genres and Naming
Despite this, I don't call Library of Ruina a Turn-Based Tactics game anymore.	* also despite spending a good part of the other video explaining why I think it's Tactics
To explain why, let's take a detour and talk about game systems, starting with Turn-Based. Basically players taking turns performing actions. This includes fancier variations like units taking actions in order of initiative. Let's put basic Turn-Based combat here on a graph.		8 Minutes Of Octopath Traveler Gameplay
Next is Final Fantasy's Active Time Battle where the player has to wait for gauges to fill up before getting to act. Depending on the game or user settings this can be closer or farther away from vanilla. Now we can define the axis of our graph, going from left to right increases the amount of "active input" in the game system. And by “active”, we mean things like the player needing to get the timing right, or being able to enter the right amount of inputs at a certain time frame.	eg. timing, amount of entered input required	Final Fantasy VI (III NA release)
Another good example of a system that requires active input would be Turn-based with Quick Time Events. Think Mario RPGs where hitting buttons at the right timing will block or deal more damage. I'll put them here, requiring more or less active input than ATB depending on the the variation.		Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door - Nintendo Direct 9.14.2023
And on the extreme end are non-Turn-Based games: your real time strategies, your action games, and even platformers.		Stormgate Lies of P Super Mario Bros. Wonder – Launch Trailer – Nintendo Switch
Then in this gap are the Real Time With Pause games - these are still not Turn-Based, but adding a pause gives you back one of the main advantages of Turn-Based systems: You have all the time to strategize your next moves.		Footage from Lobotomy Corporation
Now that we've completed this graph, let's digress a bit further and address what some of you may be thinking way back when I talked about Clashing and how most games just stayed with tanking damage rather than innovating, that is: “What about QTE”? Like we already have a sort of Clashing and even a Combo mechanic here, right? And to that I say Do we really need extra inputs from the player for them to happen in game? Surely we can implement them way back here rather than stray this far. To be clear, there is nothing wrong with getting away from the basic Turn-Based formula; it's ultimately a design choice that a developer makes when building their game. But whenever Turn-Based games add active elements to their core gameplay to spice things up, it just feels a bit off for me. Even worse is when some games overdo it to the point that they might as well ditch Turn-Based altogether. Long story short, I prefer games that try to improve Turn-Based Combat within the constraints of the system, or, as we shall see in a bit, at least try to go in a different direction than QTE.	* Mario RPGs ge a pass because the mainline games are platformers and because it's Mario	Paper Mario: The Origami King - Announcement Trailer - Nintendo Switch Final Fantasy XIII-2: Enhanced Battle System Trailer Shin Megami Tensei V: Vengeance - Complete Guide | NSW, PS5/4, Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, Steam, PC
Getting back to the original digression, it's clear from this line that the opposite of Turn-Based is active gameplay. But where do Auto-Battlers and Library of Ruina fit in here? Right around Turn-Based.		Backpack Battles Yes, LoR not being all the way to the left is intentional.
Obviously, game systems involve more complicated factors than this single line, so let's expand it to one more axis how many units act simultaneously.	very similar active input levels, but obviously very different
Instead of being next to it, now these two systems are opposite of basic Turn-Based Combat. Real-Time combat is still farther away, but Turn-Based variations can be closer. And if I had better video editing skills, I'd add a third dimension and axis - “tactical control” - so I could add in Turn-Based Tactics and distinguish Ruina from Auto-Battlers. But let's stick with these two axes and return to the original problem why calling Library of Ruina Turn-Based Tactics isn't enough: namely, they just aren't the same.	not Turn-Based Tactics?	Turn-Based Tactics example is Disgaea
Well, it turns out that there's already a well-established distinction between these two: Library of Ruina is a WEGO tactics game. WEGO as in “We Go at the same time”.	WEGO: We Go at the same time WeGo is a turn-based style of gameplay where orders are given for both sides, and then executed simultaneously. During the execution phase, no player input is allowed.	WeGo (Concept) - Giant Bomb Frozen Synapse
In contrast, almost every Tactics or vanilla Turn-Based game follow the opposite: IGOUGO that is, “I go first, then you go”.	IGOUGO: I Go (first, then) You Go * IGOUGO may also specifically refer to the simpler version where all units from one side goes first before another team does the same; the alternating initiative-based gameplay you can see here is part of the broader definition
Calling Ruina a WEGO tactics game leads to a different problem, however, as its such a niche subgenre of a subgenre that very few people know about it, which defeats the purpose of assigning a genre to let people know what the game is about.	WEGO is so obscure that no one has updated this list (one of the few out there) to include Library of Ruina Even I didn't realize Megami Tensei I was WEGO until I recorded it for this video "WEGO Tactical Game" - more accurate description but terrible for marketing
So... we reach the main point of this chapter: What do we call Library of Ruina's combat system then? How about we just go with the marketing material and call it “Library Battle Simulation”? While it's marketable, lore-friendly and all, it shares the same problem as WEGO, anyone reading it will have absolutely no clue what it is all about, possibly negatively affecting their purchasing decision.		Also didn't mention that LBS can either be "pounds (lbs.)" or 1 character away from a nasty illness.
So what do I call Library of Ruina's system if someone would ask me about it nowadays? It's a Turn-based Clash-focused Combo-driven Hybrid Tactical Auto-Battler Deckbuilding Card Game. Or Hybrid Tactical Auto-Battler Card Game for short. The Hybrid part is key, as it clearly tells the prospective player that it's a mix of genres Project Moon have even started using this description …sort of, but we're getting ahead of ourselves.	* or I could just send them this video	Library of Ruina (NSW/PS4 ports)
Anyway, I think this description's good enough for most cases, though it's not quite on the level of other genres. It needs to be more catchy, or even provocative. Here's some that I pulled out of my ass: Alright, digression over.	"Project Moon Battle System" - or something more franchise-wide than "Library Battle Simulation" "Combined Brawl and Tactics" (CBT) - because funni "KRPG" - cheeky backronym, needs other indie KR devs to make their own take on what's not J/C/T/_RPG, not to be confused with MMO	"PMBS" is meh in hindsight, having the same abbreviation problem as LBS. "LCBS" might be better. I kinda like both CBT and KRPG, the former is more succinct but somehow less troll-y than the uber-cheeky KRPG (with the similar-but-very-different contrast to / dig at JRPG).
Lore meets Gameplay
By now you might be thinking that Project Moon must have been going out of their way intentionally breaking every rule in the book. That might just be the case, but I think at least some of them were simply happy accidents. Case in point: the Emotion System. This concept has been around from the start, in the initial crowdfunding details, and even in the Alpha footage.	Early version of the Emotion Level, Gauge, and (now hidden) Scale
Lore-wise, the Library rewards heightened emotions, regardless if it's positive or negative. In game terms, Positive Emotions can come from stuff like killing an enemy, and Negative can come from the opposite, like bad rolls.	+3 Positive Emotion +1 Negative Emotion (roll minimum value)	Library of Ruina Dubbing and OST Production | Tumblbug - Crowdfunding for Creators
Once a unit or a team gets enough Emotions, they're given rewards like full resource refreshes, and other stuff I won't spoil in this video.	will use 1 Light, will use 2 Light Level 0: normal 1 Light gain, Level 1: +1 max Light, full refresh
On the surface, this is a straightforward example of having an initial in-universe concept then adding it into your game.	translation from the Steam store page (see "Conflicts that Build Emotion" section)
The accidental part arises when you consider the Focus-Fire trope, yet another widely accepted thing in video games that most really don't stop to think about. Basically in RTSs and games in general where you control groups of units, it's usually mathematically optimal to focus fire and take out the enemy team one by one.	Focus fire on single targets, Fire at closest target WINS, LOSES	Footage from the LoR guide, quick "animation" I made using Starcraft sprites.
But it's not the case in Library of Ruina; the Emotion System rewards Clashes much more than one-sided attacks. And since those rewards can easily turn the tide of battle, the game clearly doesn't want you to Focus-Fire.
Again, I don't know if they intentionally went out of their way to discourage this decades-old trope, though I like to think it's just emergent behavior coming from combining crazy concepts together.	Unintentional Feature? Lore demands more action-packed combat (ie. not passive) -> Greater rewards for Clashes -> Focus fire and tanking damage are discouraged
I mean, the removal of dedicated healing abilities I mentioned way earlier also discourages Focus-Fire, and that has its own chicken-and-egg scenario.	Less Healing in the game -> Focus fire and tanking damage are discouraged -> Reduced damage taken means Healing is overpowered -> loop back
And that's it for my not-so-quick overview of Library of Ruina's complex combat system. I could continue listing out other stuff they added to the combat but I think you got the point; Library of Ruina chose to take a radically different path compared to other games. Instead, let's talk about something more important:
What are the problems with going down this route?
What are the problems with going down this route? Which is a silly question, especially if we rephrase it as What problems will a small indie developer face if they decide to practically invent a new combat system for their game? I could try to be funny and just answer "All the problems" and call it a day, but that wouldn't be that informative so I'll be going over some of the main problems then call it a day.
Alright, top of the list - UI. No surprise here, we live in a time when you've got bigger more established studios spewing out hideous UI in their games, And that's even when they already had previous UI to work off from.		26 Minutes of Suicide Squad Kill the Justice League Gameplay (4K 60FPS)
On the other hand, Library of Ruina had to figure out how to combine UI from vastly different genres and make them work. Really how do you do it? Maybe look at some other hybrid games like Fights in Tight Spaces and Midnight Suns? But even then we have to squeeze in the missing parts like the auto-battler and the clashing into UIs already on the verge of being too busy. In short, a non-janky UI would've required a miracle. To be fair, what we ended up with isn't that terrible, especially when you get the hang of the hard parts like how Clashes are assigned, and mentally calculating the order of attacks.	* yeah, both games came after Library of Ruina	Fights in Tight Spaces - Launch Trailer Marvel's Midnight Suns: The First 28 Minutes of Gameplay
Unfortunately that's the next problem how to make new players get the hang of what's essentially a new type of game. If you've been playing the same games over and over again and have forgotten how long it takes to properly learn a new game system, try learning Chess, Go, or any variation of Poker or Mahjong through a video game, preferably one that isn't a cultural staple where you're from. Better yet, go watch someone doing it. Yeah, it's not as simple as it looks. While it may only take a few minutes to learn the absolute basics, it will take a lot longer for a new player to learn enough to play semi-competently. And I haven't even factored in trying to make a guide for a moving target, changing the tutorial every time you decide to make a major change to the core gameplay.		Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 - Gameplay Trailer | gamescom 2023 Chess.com lessons Mahjong Soul
All that said, being in a difficult position doesn't excuse the problems the game has with its onboarding process. The gameplay eventually became stable, and they had all the time to make things better. Beyond the bare minimum walls of text and manual, a game as complicated as this one should at least have an improved in-game manual with animations, extra examples, and possibly a search function.		Factorio
To Project Moon's credit, they did try to go the extra mile with the tutorial. There's this idea in game design where instead of relying on annoying popups to teach certain parts of a game, one can place players into situations where they can pick the concepts up by themselves, whether consciously or subconsciously. And Library of Ruina does the same with certain stages. At first, it could seem like the game took a big leap in difficulty, but if the player pays attention, they could figure out a game mechanic or two that makes the stage much easier than it initially seemed. Unfortunately, these battles turned out to be too difficult for some players and some of them were nerfed to the point that you can beat them without even learning what they're meant to teach. Oh well, at least they tried.		Sequelitis - Mega Man Classic vs. Mega Man X
The third problem, you've already saw a chapter on it. And I could continue, but I've already made my point. If any one of these can result in lost sales or even refunds, just imagine having to deal all of them at the same time.
Trying for Free (Limbus Company)
So you found all of this interesting and decided to check it out on Steam… then you learn that it's a bit too expensive for a game that might turn out to be too janky for your taste. Normally, I'd suggest waiting for a sale. But if you're watching close to when I originally posted this, there might not be a price cut soon as they've recently released new ports and a discount would just cut into their sales. Thankfully, there's a perfectly legal way to try out the combat system for free. Limbus Company is a spinoff sequel available on Steam, iOS, and Android. It's a gacha game, but you can get a feel of the combat without spending a single cent on it. And you do that by simply playing your way to the third Canto. The prologue and first Canto are tutorial chapters, and while the second Canto does start to get a bit more challenging at certain points, you can luck your way through some battles meant to nudge you to learn the game's mechanics. On the other hand, the third Canto's hard enough that learning the mechanics is almost essential. Also, unlike the previous Canto, you will have to grind for XP. If you don't want to grind, you can alternatively try out the Rogue-like dungeon that opens up at the same point in the game. As of this recording, all of the Mirror Dungeons so far have an easy mode that automatically levels up all your units to max level, removing the need for grinding. While this is a quicker way to get a good feel of the combat, there is one big downside: currently there are out-of-context spoilers in the later floors. Might not be an issue if you're just here for the combat and will likely forget about the spoilers when you get around to doing an actual playthrough. But if you do mind spoilers, better stick to the main story.		SteamDB Library of Ruina Limbus Company (Steam)
Since we're on the topic, here's a quick rundown of what spoils what in the franchise. If you're planning to play Lobotomy Corporation and don't want spoilers, tough luck, both games spoil the first game from the get go.	Both Spoil (LobCorp) * also means you can play both without playing LobCorp first
On the other hand, thanks to it being a spinoff, Limbus Company doesn't spoil Library of Ruina. Until you go too far into the main story. And don't ignore the banners and events. But other than that you'll be fine…	unless you... go too far into the main story (Canto 3 is still fine) get into a Mirror Dungeon encounter based on later Canto pay close attention to running events and gacha banners (especially "Walpurgisnacht")
Back to the combat, note that Limbus Company doesn't quite use the same system as Ruina. Most of what I talked about are still present, however the changes are big enough that I feel that I should at least give you a quick rundown so that the awkward tutorial doesn't confuse you as much. If you're one of those “just give me an overview and I'll figure the rest on my own” types, this is a good time to pause the video, download Limbus Company and spend the rest of the day or two playing up to Canto 3. Or you can skip to the final chapter and finish the video first. Anyway on to the changes…
Differences between LoR and LCB Combat
If most of Library of Ruina's quirks can be traced back to its Auto-Battler roots, most of the changes done to Limbus Company's combat can be similarly traced back to a single reason: it's now a mobile game.	* Steam and iOS weren't mentioned in the first PV	[ Limbus Company ] Official Promotion Video
Smaller screens mean deckbuilding would be too awkward so it's out. Instead, you select Identities for your units, with each Identity having their own stats, abilities, and a fixed set of Skills - basically their decks. You can also give your units extra E.G.O, special attacks that you can activate as you have the resources for them. Of course, nowadays when we talk about mobile games, we don't just mean portable or having smaller screens. We generally refer to microtransaction heavy games like Free-to-Play Gacha. Oh those Identities and E.G.O I just mentioned? Pullable from Gacha.		Version 1.0 Gameplay Trailer | Genshin Impact
Alright, let's get this out of the way: I hate Live Services, Battle Passes, and I absolutely HATE Gacha. But I, and presumably many other Project Moon fans in a similar boat, are fine with paying for the game simply because the devs straight up said in an interview that this was a fund raiser for other projects. A Faustian Bargain, if you will. It helps that it doesn't feel like a gacha game sometimes, with cheap and bankable stamina, and most stuff grindable through gameplay, that includes current banners. And that's all I'll say about the monetization and gacha for now. I'll leave the rest to another video.	* even without extra grinding, daily/weekly bonuses alone from 2-3 weeks of play provide enough summoning material for an SR (SSR or E.G.O with paid battle pass)	2021 ProjectMoon Q&A 림버스 컴퍼니 적안 료슈 | Limbus Company Red Eyes Ryoshu
Back to the combat, the screen size limitation means that the combat has to be simpler.	i.e. can play with minimal and finger-imprecise input
With Dailies and replayable Rogue-like dungeons, it also has to be faster.	i.e. dailies shouldn't take too much time to finish
The tactical combat wasn't taken out, however, but is now called Focused Encounters and is limited to special situations like boss battles. The default replacing it, Regular Encounters, sacrifices tactical options for the aforementioned simpler and faster combat. If we have a sliding scale between Auto-Battlers and Turn-based Tactics: Library of Ruina's all the way here Limbus Company's Focused Encounters are slightly less tactical, and Regular Encounters sit about here, firmly in the Auto-Battler side.		"Opening chess position from black side" by MichaelMaggs (Wikimedia Commons)
A quick rundown of what makes it faster: There's a fixed attacking pattern, pause if you want to read about it. Basically, the game already chooses the targets for you, and you just need to choose the appropriate skill. Kinda like the Alpha. Not being able to choose the targets can lead to poor matchups, but that's what the E.G.Os are for.	The targeting scheme blurb is too big for this script, just pause and read it on the video.
Next on the speed-up: unlike before where attacks are resolved one by one, the game can now display multiple clashes and attacks simultaneously. If you look closely, you might be able to figure out what sort of trickery the game does to pull this off.		hint: look at the sanity
And finally, if a unit's original target dies before they get to attack, they proceed to the next valid target so the attack isn't wasted.	Yi Sang is targeting Hat Enemy twice Kills enemy on first attack Proceeds to attack next enemy	If it's still confusing, rewind a bit to confirm that mexican-themed guy isn't targeted by either of Yi Sang's slots.
Moving on to other changes, you might have already noticed the next major one from the footage I've been showing: the Dice have been replaced by Coins. On the surface, this might seem like a huge downgrade, but this Coin battling mechanic can be trickier than it looks. I'm not going to post another wall of text explaining it, but feel free to head to my other video to learn how it works.	4 + 4 (Heads) + 4 (Heads) + 4 (Atk Lvl diff) = 16, Win 4 + (-1) (Heads) = 3, Lose 4 + 4 (Heads) = 8 Base Dmg (1st attack) 8 (prev result) + 4 (Heads) = 12 Base Dmg (2nd attack) Total Base Dmg = 20 Final Total Dmg = 32
A good example why Coins aren't that simple is how they don't always flip 50/50 Heads or Tails. Instead, they're affected by a unit's Sanity. A call back to Lobotomy Corporation, Sanity starts from 0, and can go up to 45, or down to -45. 45 seems to be an odd choice, until you do the math. 50% Heads on a coin flip plus 45 gives you 95%. In other words, a Tails at max Sanity is a Critical Miss on a D20 die. So yeah, Coins are basically Dice. There are multiple ways to gain Sanity, but the most reliable way is to win a Clash, with longer Clashes also giving more Sanity. As some of you may have realized, this essentially makes it the counterpart to Ruina's Emotion system, encouraging Clashes over one-sided attacks.	62% chance of Heads per coin flip 3 Clash count = +14 Sanity	Critical Failure Baldur'S Gate 3 GIF
Alright, I think that's enough for an overview for the changes between Library of Ruina and Limbus Company's combat. I could go on with more changes, but let's not forget why I'm even talking about them in a video that's supposed to be about the former. In short, if you're gonna follow my suggestion to play Limbus Company for free first to see if you like the combat enough to buy Library of Ruina, just remember that they're not quite the same.
Traveling this Path (wrap up, game design thoughts)
While we've covered all of what I've listed at the start, I still need to clarify a few more things... However, this last part's for the game devs; the rest of you can just skip to the end screen. Saves you a couple of minutes to do other stuff like watch videos or grind mirror dungeons or something. I'm not gonna stop you from sticking around, though.
Anyway, say you're an aspiring game designer or developer. You stumble upon this video without knowing about the game, then you see the pros, the cons, and a glimpse of the end result. Calling to mind the title, or its more popular variation “The Road Less Traveled”, this finally convinces you to take a similar leap in your game. As a fan of games that push boundaries, I'd love to see more games do the same. But I also don't want to see indie games fail, and what I've shown you in the past 40 minutes doesn't provide enough context to make such a bold decision. This missing context leading to misinformed decisions is perfectly encapsulated by the title: It's not “The Road Less Traveled”, it's “The Road Not Taken”, and it's a direct reference to the Robert Frost poem. For the Project Moon fans still sticking around, pat yourself on the back if you saw this literary allusion from a mile away. Point is, the said poem has a reputation of being misunderstood. Of course, text can have multiple interpretations; even those explained by their authors can be interpreted differently. But for this one, the misreading comes from not paying enough attention to the text, or being only familiar with the derivative work. For example, a common interpretation is it's about indecisiveness, and the importance of making a choice. This reading's a bit infamous for possibly convincing the poem's intended reader to go fight in World War I. But apart from that, it's a good lesson to pick up. However, interpretations like it don't seem to match the poem's intent once you actually read the lines. Things pop out like how the two roads are not that different, or how that powerful last statement is undermined by what came before it. Analyzing the poem any further will put us a bit off track so let's just go back to our main topic.		Terra Invicta (Steam) The Road Not Taken (Wikipedia) The Road Not Taken (HathiTrust) The Death of the Author (Wikipedia)
To recap, if game designers see all this, they might start doing crazy shit in their games. But they're missing some key context, so their game fails, and I get blamed in the end. I don't want that, so I'll be going through some alternative interpretations of the title and give you the missing context. First, the indecisiveness that we already covered. As I said, it may not be what the poem's about, but it's still a good lesson. Especially in game dev, sometimes you just have to do it, whatever it is. Just keep in mind what happened to the first guy.
Next, it's about nonconformity, taking the less traveled path leads to success. We're getting away from the original poem, but after seeing all this, I could understand why you'd think this way. But no. Gonna make a mildy hot take here, but had the devs chosen a more mundane combat system, the game probably would've ended up in the same boat. It's easier to see once you notice that I've only been focusing on the combat, and made sure not to talk about the rest of the game: the Themes, Story, the Characters, the World, the Art, the Music, and so on. Each of those are worth noting on their own, and combat is just one part, maybe even the weakest link. I'd go as far to say that the game would've gotten a wider audience if they chose something more mainstream.
Next interpretation is often related to the previous, as nonconformity usually implies forging one's own path. You might think I'd also disagree with this, but this one, oddly fits. The missing context here is that I also made sure not to show or talk about the late, or even mid-game, combat. I'm gonna be vague here to lessen the spoilers, but the combat starts out as a clunky yet ambitious system, and the devs built it up with layer upon layer of new gameplay elements, while keeping it intertwined with the themes and the story. I don't want to overhype what they did with the combat, but if this “stageplay” setup remained a mere gimmick and didn't evolve to what we got later in the game, and what we have right now in the sequel… Mili's great, but there's no way every single boss battle in the franchise would have this much play time if the fights themselves didn't carry that much emotional weight. In other words, while the choice to go this route may not have made a difference, Project Moon worked hard to make sure it did.	* especially considering the very niche nature of the franchise +3 more Boss themes not on this list w/ 1.5M+ plays ** even the non-vocal mid-Boss fight music are on players' playlists *** there's also other streaming services, YouTube, reposts, remixes, covers, etc.	Mili (Spotify) StudioEIM (YouTube) Dark Fantasy Studio (YouTube)
And the last, taking the previous two to a reckless extreme, do it because it's difficult and risky. I have no idea how you got to this, maybe you confused the line with some other motivational saying, but I can't deny that some people out there want a challenge. This one's a bit tricky, I sort of agree with the concept, but disagree with the interpretation, mostly on the “risk” part.		"Everest, Himalayas" by Vyacheslav Argenberg (Wikimedia Commons)
This time, the context isn't totally missing, I mentioned it at the start: Library of Ruina was a heavily anticipated sequel with a crowdfunding campaign that smashed its goals. With an existing fanbase, the devs were in a slightly less risky position as they can get away with things that the main audience would let slide or even downright expect. For instance, the early-game world-building might feel a bit too much if this was a typical game, but that's exactly what many of us were looking forward to: we were literally living under a rock in the previous game.	Too much early-game world-building vs actual gameplay?
But there's something else about the fanbase that makes this route a lot less risky: The people looking forward to the game the most are the ones who finished Lobotomy Corporation, a game so janky, tedious, and soul-crushing that even at 2024, a time when streamers eat Souls-likes for breakfast, it's still pretty rare to find content creators that go through the whole thing that aren't already Project Moon veterans.	* showing my playthrough videos since most other playthroughs completing the game have spoiler thumbnails ** also shows a preview of how freaking long this game is	ELDEN RING Shadow of the Erdtree – Story Trailer
And LobCorp finishers can be very, very stubborn and determined players: a radically new combat system with a difficult to use UI isn't going to stop them from playing. Maybe too determined - I'm fairly sure that a decent amount of the player base were able to finish the game not through deckbuilding skill or tactical decision making, but through sheer determination, and repeating battles until they get really, really lucky. And, sorry to be blunt, you're probably not one of the few developers or studios out there that have the same kind of fanbase.		Fear & Hunger 2: Termina - Release Trailer DEATH STRANDING DIRECTOR'S CUT - FINAL Trailer - [ESRB] 4K Touhou Kouryudou ~ Unconnected Marketeers (Steam) If the "?" is still confusing, what I mean by this point is that yes, PM took a challenging route, but no it wasn't totally risky for these reasons. Compare that with an aspiring game dev, which will both face a challenging AND risky route if they make a new game system or go for something really obscure/niche.
Alright, that's all the context I can give without spoiling too much about the game or the franchise as a whole. If after seeing this you're still going to take the off beaten path, like waaay off… Good Luck!
End Screen
And that's it for this video; to the right are my intros to Library of Ruina and Limbus Company. If you're lucky, the latter's no longer the quick and dirty one that I made a few days after launch. To the left are my tips for Lobotomy Corporation, for those who were intrigued by what I said about the game's fans. Anyway, thanks for watching and see you in the next video.

Misc.

WebVTT captions: download WebVTT captions

Translations are welcome, contact me at bry@bryanbibat.net if you're interested in submitting one.