The editors over at RPG Italia were able to corner Iron Tower's Vince D. Weller for a hefty interview about The Age of Decadence and the design decisions that have gone into the isometric, turn-based role-playing game. Some of the English translations aren't spot-on, but it's very readable nonetheless:
Another choice surely against the flow is that of utilizing a classic isometric camera. Has it been only a functional choice or even a nostalgic recall to the classic Black Isle/Troika RPG's? Have you been inspired yourself to other title in the development of Age of Decadence? And by some other non-videoludic source (books, films, etc.)?
It's a personal preference. Some like first/third person, we like isometric. For me, nothing beats the combination of isometric and turn-based. It's an instant attention and interest grabber. As for the influences, I'd say Fallout's great overall design and game flow, Planescape: Torment's brilliant dialogues, Prelude to Darkness' very interesting and original game design, fantastic factions' dynamics in Glen Cook's The Tower of Fear, and Quarzhasaat's atmosphere of a decadent, corrupted city, kept alive by scheming and memories of the glorious past that's long gone in Michael Moorcock's Fortress of the Pearl, Cook's The Black Company's series overall atmosphere and the link to the past, and China Mieville's approach to the arcane in The Scar.
Will the choice focus more on the approach side (diplomatic/brutal/stealth/etc.) or on the moral side? The moral choice? for that second case will it be a classic good/neutral/evil system or a more ambigous one?
The game features both multiple quest solutions (i.e. different ways to approach and complete your objectives) and different choices affecting the gameworld, factions, and NPCs. I'm not putting any labels on the latter choices, which is why there is no good/evil system in the game. These things are very subjective and the road to hell is indeed paved with good intentions. Our approach is to provide motivations, show you things from different angles, avoiding clichÃ©s like good guys and bad guys (whatever side you pick is the good guys, the other side is the bad guys), and adding some reactivity. I don't think you'd feel bad if you double-cross an NPC and earn 5 evil points. You would, however, regret your choice greatly, if the double-crossed NPC ambush you with his rough looking buddies and chop your outnumbered character to pieces to teach him a valuable lesson about morals and values.