To make it a bit clearer in comparison with the infinity games.
Those games had backgrounds that were rendered for VGA displays (640x480) at the low end of screen support we are quadrupling those numbers and targeting a 6x9 aspect ratio, at the high-end we might be approaching 10 times the pixel count. IWD maps were around: 3840x2880 pixel
I'm at the point of agreeing. I'm not a fan of Neogaf and especially not a fan of them when they meltdown about something but I think the *don't show if it's not ready* isn't entirly unwarranted as it was a bit naive to assume something like this wouldn't happen.
HOWEVER that thread begins to cross the line. And not pretty.
Agree 100% ---- I will stick to my warning that if they take any of their currently-released character artwork and carry it forward in actual game development, they will merely be trying to polish their own turds from this point forward. For this to have any hope at greatness, they need to fire their current concept artist (intern from China? read the update and that's what it sounds like......) and hire someone competent and creative.
I mean, what?
At least 1-2 of the reasonable people in the thread are calling him out.
C2B on
+1
Options
BrocksMulletInto the sunrise, on a jet-ski. Natch.Registered Userregular
While I'm not particularly wild about the stuff they have released so far, the people jumping up and down need to take a lesson in iterative design. The first stuff rarely looks good at this stage. A lot of the really cool concept art that gets released has often gone through several iterations where the artists have become comfortable with the subject matter and are finalizing the aesthetics of the game. There is no reason to make it ultra high fidelity when your going to be change things up several times over. Yes there are concept artists who can knock your socks off the first time through. But they probably already have a good idea of what everyone wants. For a first time fantasy IP your going to need some time to work things out so it's not surprising that it looks kind of generic right now.
Agree 100% ---- I will stick to my warning that if they take any of their currently-released character artwork and carry it forward in actual game development, they will merely be trying to polish their own turds from this point forward. For this to have any hope at greatness, they need to fire their current concept artist (intern from China? read the update and that's what it sounds like......) and hire someone competent and creative.
I mean, what?
At least 1-2 of the reasonable people in the thread are calling him out.
I love the clueless implication that having a Chinese artist is somehow bad or low rent, lazily conflating it with the negative perception of Chinese manufactured goods. Like China is not full of incredible artists produced by Russian style traditional academies that would take a giant shit all over 99% of the accredited art schools in the West.
That width is going to be a big and positive first impression. We've all played at least one or maybe a few Infinity engine games of yore and when you pick up a new one you've got in your mind some rough boundaries of the area forming in your mind before you start to really explore. But making that area about 10 times larger? Holy shit. We're gonna get lost
This just in: Part of the entire agreement of the Kickstarter was that the fans get to see a lot more behind the scenes than usual. The fans should quit being fucking stupid and realize that the nitty gritty is a lot more rough than what they're usually permitted to see.
Hilariously enough, the people who most need to internalize the "quit being fucking stupid" idea are the ones who are the least likely to do so. Because they are fucking stupid.
I love Obsidian showing us how they are making the game, I love the rough draft of the art, and I love how they are giving commentary so we understand better.
I want more of these.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
1. Let's skip traditional KS questions like "Did you really think it will get funded? What are you going to do with all this money?" and jump straight to game-making business.
So, a brand new world... What are elves and dwarves doing there? Mind you, I'm not against "encompassing the recognizable", I'm merely curious what your reasons were. Is it a Baldur's Gate thing?
A large number of players like to play familiar races. Of the common fantasy RPG races, dwarves and elves are the two that players gravitate toward most often. Also, because we stated we were making a game inspired by the Infinity Engine games and, implicitly, the Forgotten Realms setting used in most of them, it seemed appropriate.
We're going to have subrace offshoots that are slightly less traditional (like the "boreal" dwarves that people have already seen) as well as increasingly unusual races like orlans, aumaua, and godlike, but if you want to play a fair-haired bow-twanging elf or an axe-swinging bearded dwarf, we've got it covered.
2. As a follow up question, when it comes to recognizable and familiar vs strange and bizarre, how far is too far? Do you find that the players in general are more comfortable with the familiar? How willing are they to take their time to figure out something truly different?
People in general are more comfortable with the familiar, but players vary a great deal. Some players react extremely negatively if any aspect of the setting or mechanics in the game is unusual or unorthodox. Some players are of the opinion that if something's been done before, they're not interested in seeing it done again. There are also single-issue gamers. I've seen gamers who aren't interested in an RPG unless there are dwarves in it and I've seen gamers who write off an RPG if there are firearms in it. Above all else, many RPG fans are passionate, so if you push their buttons, there's a good chance the response will be strong.
I also think that gamers often trip over the same logical and emotional hurdles that anyone does. If they've used something before and liked the experience, it can be hard for them to see the flaws in that experience. Similarly, if they don't like the ideas they formulate about how something is going to work, they can have difficulty revising their views even after it's been explained to work contrary to their assumptions.
3. So, a brand new world, with elves, dwarves, the godlike and the odd, as well as souls and firearms. How do the firearms fit in there from the design perspective?
I think early firearms are interesting and I've enjoyed reading about their use in late Medieval and early modern Europe. From a gameplay perspective, they pack more of a punch than bows and crossbows, but they have worse accuracy and take much longer to reload. They're also particularly good at penetrating wizards' arcane veils, which are commonly used for defense. In our setting, I believe the presence of firearms helps shift the feeling of the world away from the equivalent of Earth's High Middle Ages and into the Late Middle Ages and early modern period. Europe's early modern period was a time of domestic social unrest and extensive exploration by imperial powers. I think those topics aren't explored a lot in fantasy RPGs (Maztica [RIP] being a notable exception) and the presence of firearms helps give the feeling of that age.
4. Speaking of arcane veils and such, one of the most praised features in BG2 was the mage duels. In BG a wizard was an annoying pest lurking behind fighters and waiting to be shot full of arrows. In BG a wizard was an impregnable juggernaut, capable of wiping out your entire party, if it was caught unprepared. What should we expect in Project Eternity?
Personally, I believe AD&D elevated the "glass cannon" conception of wizards to an un-fun place. It's cool that, especially in 2nd Edition, wizards had so many spells to use, but in Baldur's Gate II, I believe it resulted in more-or-less strict combat puzzles rather than loose combat puzzles or tactical challenges. If the only viable way through a fight is to use a specific sequence of spells, that's not something that you tactically opt to do -- it's the thing you must do to move forward. And in many of those fights, the only way to figure out what spells to use is to trigger the fight, get wiped, reload, and try again.
I think we can still have powerful, high-threat wizards in Project Eternity without using rock-paper-scissors defense and counter mechanics. I'd like to present players with challenges that make them think of a variety of solutions. I want them to feel like they can be flexible and adaptive when an unforeseen challenge appears. If the game comes out and I see walkthroughs that all suggest the exact same tactics for going through a tough fight, I believe that's a failure on my part.
5. Stamina, health, and regeneration. A lot has been speculated on the topic, so would you mind clarifying it? What are the advantages of a "dual-bar" system? What does it do that a single-bar system can't? What role does stamina regeneration play?
The "dual-bar" or two resource system allows the player to have separate tactical and strategic resources for their characters' survivability in combat. In most versions of A/D&D, you have hit points that determine how much damage a character can take before he or she can no longer perform actions in combat. If you're playing in a more forgiving edition, you also have "Death's Door" rules that allow the character to dip into negative hit point values without being killed outright.
Many A/D&D adventures have an expectation of periodic healing, so if your party members have a rough fight, the party cleric, druid, or maybe paladin has to spend resources to make you viable for the next fight. This leads to the "healing battery" expectation, where someone in the party has to devote strategic resources to healing between fights -- or you're stuck walking back to a resting location with high frequency. Neither of those options are particularly enjoyable for many players.
With Stamina and Health, Stamina represents short term damage (shock, impact trauma, initial pain) and Health represents "the bad stuff" (burns, cuts, bruised ribs, etc.). When you take damage, you lose Stamina, but you also lose Health at a fixed ratio to the amount of Stamina damage you took. Currently it's at 1:4 Health:Stamina. When you run out of Stamina, your character gets knocked out, just like hitting 0 hit points in most editions of A/D&D. You're effectively out of the fight and you're not going to get back up without outside assistance.
If you're conscious, Stamina will regenerate quickly. "How quickly, Josh?" I don't know, man, but... pretty fast. It's the thing you're most likely to run out of in combat, but you'll probably get most or all of it back before you start another fight. You can also recover Stamina through the use of spells or class abilities, so it's something you can choose to tactically manage in combat. Between fights, it's really not an issue. No one has to cast ten healing spells in a row to get characters back into fighting shape because the Stamina will return in short order.
Health damage doesn't regenerate and you can't get it back with magic. You have to rest to recover Health. If your Health hits zero, you'll either enter some form of maimed/critically injured (and unconscious) state or, optionally (and all the time in Expert mode), be killed outright. If you explore far away from rest locations and keep getting your faces pounded in, you can have characters with very low Health and high Stamina. That's a dangerous circumstance to be in because even one or two blows could lead to a character being maimed or killed.
Ultimately, the mechanics are present to allow "hit points" and unconsciousness to be a real threat in individual combats without necessitating the presence of a healer or resting to allow for more exploration.
6. What are your thoughts on combat difficulty? Where is the line between challenging and frustrating? Would we have to download "Sawyer's Hardcore Mod!" separately (btw, loved the mod, great work) to enjoy Project Eternity properly or would it be a challenging experience "out of the box"?
Thanks. You should not need to download a separate mod for a challenge, but there will be a pretty big gulf between playing on standard difficulty without Expert and playing on higher difficulty with Expert (not to mention the other two challenge modes). My opinion on challenge is that accomplishments you achieve without some measure of frustration often feel unfulfilling, but every player has his or her own comfort zone for frustration. Some players only feel satisfied if the frustration level is high and the game is kicking them in the virtual groin. Other players really don't deal well with adversity and would rather overcome conflicts with minimal resistance.
I do think it's worth saying that tactical combat is a core part of the game, as it was for almost all of the Infinity Engine games. If someone simply doesn't like combat, Project Eternity may not be the game for them. There are ways to avoid combat or gain a distinct advantage in combat, but a good chunk of the game is built around it.
7. Tim Cain said that "Non-combat skills are gained separately from combat skills. You shouldn't have to choose between Magic Missile and Herbalism." May I ask why?
Everyone in a party contributes to the party's overall combat efficacy and failure in a combat challenge is a game-ending (or at least reloading-invoking) event. With combat, you can fail or succeed by degrees. Failure in a non-combat challenge is usually not in degrees, but in absolutes, and there's not much (if any) tactical decision-making that can change the outcome. Additionally, combat is always a way through areas. While we are going to give players many different ways to navigate areas and resolve conflicts, combat will be a common means of moving forward.
Because combat will usually be more dominant than any single other means of conflict resolution, and because every character contributes to party combat efficacy, increasing an individual character's combat capability is always a strategically sound decision (assuming you aren't metagaming every non-combat challenge). The thing is, we want people to use non-combat skills to navigate through the environment and solve problems, so we want characters to have those skills! Dividing combat and non-combat skills into separate resources allows parties to be good in and out of combat, but a party still will not be able to cover all "bases". The system we're making doesn't assume that you have maximum combat capabilities and are buying skills like a 3E rogue with an 18 Intelligence.
8. Chris Avellone mentioned several times that the player will be able to avoid some combat encounters with non-combat skills. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that Project Eternity will be a combat-heavy game (like Baldur's Gate was) with combat oriented classes. Why would a combat party want to avoid combat? How are you going to balance the loss of experience, content, and loot?
Yes, Project Eternity will have a lot of combat (though probably not as much as Icewind Dale II!) and the classes are all "battle ready". Players can avoid or stall combat either to gain an advantage or to stretch their resources between safe resting locations. Some players may simply not want to fight certain enemies or they might want to peacefully resolve a conflict.
Tim and I would both like to use an experience system that relies heavily (if not wholly) on quest, objective (i.e. steps within a quest), and challenge (e.g. exploration rewards) rewards. We want to encourage players to solve problems by whatever means are at their disposal. Combat is a very common solution, but that shouldn't be the only solution. If our experience system discourages the use of alternate resolution mechanics, it's at odds with that goal.
As far as loot goes, I don't want to rely heavily on putting all of the best gear on enemies. Again, that would conflict with the goal of allowing the player to resolve problems in the way that they would like to.
9. Which speech/conversation skills and ability are planned or being discussed and why? Are there any spells that can grant you new dialogue-related abilities like PST's speak with the dead ability?
We haven't discussed conversation skills as much as reputation mechanics. To me, conversation is one of the primary means players have of defining the type of person they are playing in the world. Instead of a heavy emphasis on conversation skills, I would rather allow players to behave in a variety of ways and develop robust reputation systems to react to those choices throughout the game. I think it's more interesting to allow a person to select diplomatic responses and develop a reputation for being a diplomat than to level up a Diplomacy skill and pick the Diplomacy option when it's unlocked for you.
I think some of the best role-playing experiences come from expressing your character's personality in the way that you want and seeing how the world reacts to it. I believe that we can make a conversation system that allows people to do this with dialogues and characters in a natural way.
10. Chris mentioned that you "want to explore the idea of speech as a tool not as a key", citing "intimidating, flattering, pissing people off" as examples and "providing a broader context or more information on the target" as the goals/rewards. While it worked well in Planescape: Torment, it does sound like you're marginalizing the speech skills, going from one extreme (a win button) to another (mostly flavor). Any thoughts on that?
I'd like to marginalize the speech skills into the dust bin, personally. I think the player's conversation choices should be important without dead-ending quests and I think that Alpha Protocol managed to find ways to do that. There are certainly optimal choices for the player to make if you want a certain type of outcome (e.g. impressing one character instead of another), but dialogue isn't a right/wrong puzzle.
I don't think it's correct to say that I want dialogue choices to be flavor only. I want the player's choices from node to node to actually be more mechanically significant that they have been in most RPGs. That consists of two parts: the immediate reaction within the conversation and the long-term effects of how that choice feeds into your reputation. Sometimes the short-term effects are minor, but the reputation system won't "forget" what you've done.
I like the health/stamina idea. Makes a certian kind of sense and I like the strategic implications involved.
The dialog options I like a lot too. Alpha Protocol did that. If you spent most of the game as a sarcastic character, other NPC's would react differently (ie pissing Maurburg off into a fight was awesome as hell). I'm kind of seeing it as you start off with a skill of 1 in charm, intimidate, bluff, ect. If make an early choice that is charm, you gain an automatic point in it. Later down the line, you may have a conversation that has a requirement of 6 intimidate, but since you spent the whole game as a charmer, your reputation is as a charmer, so you'd fail an intimidate check. But if there was a high level charm check, you'd get it.
Pretty much the same as AP really, but you can see your conversation stats instead of them being hidden.
I've got high hopes.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
I like the health/stamina idea. Makes a certian kind of sense and I like the strategic implications involved.
The dialog options I like a lot too. Alpha Protocol did that. If you spent most of the game as a sarcastic character, other NPC's would react differently (ie pissing Maurburg off into a fight was awesome as hell). I'm kind of seeing it as you start off with a skill of 1 in charm, intimidate, bluff, ect. If make an early choice that is charm, you gain an automatic point in it. Later down the line, you may have a conversation that has a requirement of 6 intimidate, but since you spent the whole game as a charmer, your reputation is as a charmer, so you'd fail an intimidate check. But if there was a high level charm check, you'd get it.
Pretty much the same as AP really, but you can see your conversation stats instead of them being hidden.
I've got high hopes.
While I agree to an extent, I also think that just because you have a reputation as a charmer doesn't mean you can't intimidate someone. Like, for instance, that hobgoblin leader that lives in a cave. What is your reputation to him? If they want to assume that your character has no experience with any of it and learns as he goes, well then fair enough, but there's more to influencing people than just experience. Some of that is innate.
I like the health/stamina idea. Makes a certian kind of sense and I like the strategic implications involved.
The dialog options I like a lot too. Alpha Protocol did that. If you spent most of the game as a sarcastic character, other NPC's would react differently (ie pissing Maurburg off into a fight was awesome as hell). I'm kind of seeing it as you start off with a skill of 1 in charm, intimidate, bluff, ect. If make an early choice that is charm, you gain an automatic point in it. Later down the line, you may have a conversation that has a requirement of 6 intimidate, but since you spent the whole game as a charmer, your reputation is as a charmer, so you'd fail an intimidate check. But if there was a high level charm check, you'd get it.
Pretty much the same as AP really, but you can see your conversation stats instead of them being hidden.
I've got high hopes.
While I agree to an extent, I also think that just because you have a reputation as a charmer doesn't mean you can't intimidate someone. Like, for instance, that hobgoblin leader that lives in a cave. What is your reputation to him? If they want to assume that your character has no experience with any of it and learns as he goes, well then fair enough, but there's more to influencing people than just experience. Some of that is innate.
Well, hopefully they'd be smart with the dialog checks. Say you have charm at 6 and intimidate at 2 and bluff at 3. You go peacefully into a golbins den to talk to the chief. To intimidate him, you'd need a check of 4. Now, if you fight your way through the golblin den and kill them all on the way to the chief, once you talk to him, his intimidate check would be 2, because your actions showed you're ruthless as fuck.
So a scaling dialog system that's a combination of experiance skills you gain from actually doing dialog checks, and then your actions towards a certian faction.
So if you spend the whole game murdering the Knights Who Say Ni, they probably won't want to negotiate with you later and would have a higher diplomacy check. If you give them rhetorical blow jobs, they'd be easier.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
I like the health/stamina idea. Makes a certian kind of sense and I like the strategic implications involved.
The dialog options I like a lot too. Alpha Protocol did that. If you spent most of the game as a sarcastic character, other NPC's would react differently (ie pissing Maurburg off into a fight was awesome as hell). I'm kind of seeing it as you start off with a skill of 1 in charm, intimidate, bluff, ect. If make an early choice that is charm, you gain an automatic point in it. Later down the line, you may have a conversation that has a requirement of 6 intimidate, but since you spent the whole game as a charmer, your reputation is as a charmer, so you'd fail an intimidate check. But if there was a high level charm check, you'd get it.
Pretty much the same as AP really, but you can see your conversation stats instead of them being hidden.
I've got high hopes.
While I agree to an extent, I also think that just because you have a reputation as a charmer doesn't mean you can't intimidate someone. Like, for instance, that hobgoblin leader that lives in a cave. What is your reputation to him? If they want to assume that your character has no experience with any of it and learns as he goes, well then fair enough, but there's more to influencing people than just experience. Some of that is innate.
I always thought that maybe what gear you wear should have some affect on that kind of stuff.
I mean if I am wearing the God Armor of Screaming Souls and wielding the Demon Sword of Unmaking and some punk bandit tries to waylay me, I should be able to tell him to fuck off.
"Seriously kid, look at me. The freaking pauldrons of my armor are living skulls that eternally scream in agony. My sword swirls with dark energy and can cut the very fabric of reality. You just, you just don't wanna go down this road kid."
-Intimidate Check Failed-
"le sigh"
Axen on
A Capellan's favorite sheath for any blade is your back.
+3
Options
Sir CarcassI have been shown the end of my worldRound Rock, TXRegistered Userregular
I like the health/stamina idea. Makes a certian kind of sense and I like the strategic implications involved.
The dialog options I like a lot too. Alpha Protocol did that. If you spent most of the game as a sarcastic character, other NPC's would react differently (ie pissing Maurburg off into a fight was awesome as hell). I'm kind of seeing it as you start off with a skill of 1 in charm, intimidate, bluff, ect. If make an early choice that is charm, you gain an automatic point in it. Later down the line, you may have a conversation that has a requirement of 6 intimidate, but since you spent the whole game as a charmer, your reputation is as a charmer, so you'd fail an intimidate check. But if there was a high level charm check, you'd get it.
Pretty much the same as AP really, but you can see your conversation stats instead of them being hidden.
I've got high hopes.
While I agree to an extent, I also think that just because you have a reputation as a charmer doesn't mean you can't intimidate someone. Like, for instance, that hobgoblin leader that lives in a cave. What is your reputation to him? If they want to assume that your character has no experience with any of it and learns as he goes, well then fair enough, but there's more to influencing people than just experience. Some of that is innate.
Well, hopefully they'd be smart with the dialog checks. Say you have charm at 6 and intimidate at 2 and bluff at 3. You go peacefully into a golbins den to talk to the chief. To intimidate him, you'd need a check of 4. Now, if you fight your way through the golblin den and kill them all on the way to the chief, once you talk to him, his intimidate check would be 2, because your actions showed you're ruthless as fuck.
So a scaling dialog system that's a combination of experiance skills you gain from actually doing dialog checks, and then your actions towards a certian faction.
So if you spend the whole game murdering the Knights Who Say Ni, they probably won't want to negotiate with you later and would have a higher diplomacy check. If you give them rhetorical blow jobs, they'd be easier.
Yeah, that would be pretty cool and it sounds like maybe a possibility.
I like the health/stamina idea. Makes a certian kind of sense and I like the strategic implications involved.
The dialog options I like a lot too. Alpha Protocol did that. If you spent most of the game as a sarcastic character, other NPC's would react differently (ie pissing Maurburg off into a fight was awesome as hell). I'm kind of seeing it as you start off with a skill of 1 in charm, intimidate, bluff, ect. If make an early choice that is charm, you gain an automatic point in it. Later down the line, you may have a conversation that has a requirement of 6 intimidate, but since you spent the whole game as a charmer, your reputation is as a charmer, so you'd fail an intimidate check. But if there was a high level charm check, you'd get it.
Pretty much the same as AP really, but you can see your conversation stats instead of them being hidden.
I've got high hopes.
While I agree to an extent, I also think that just because you have a reputation as a charmer doesn't mean you can't intimidate someone. Like, for instance, that hobgoblin leader that lives in a cave. What is your reputation to him? If they want to assume that your character has no experience with any of it and learns as he goes, well then fair enough, but there's more to influencing people than just experience. Some of that is innate.
I always thought that maybe what gear you wear should have some affect on that kind of stuff.
I mean if I am wearing the God Armor of Screaming Souls and wielding the Demon Sword of Unmaking and some punk bandit tries to waylay me, I should be able to tell him to fuck off.
"Seriously kid, look at me. The freaking pauldrons of my armor are living skulls that eternally scream in agony. My sword swirls with dark energy and can cut the very fabric of reality. You just, you just don't wanna go down this road kid."
-Intimidate Check Failed-
"le sigh"
The multiverse is full of idiots.
More souls to feed your pauldrons imo
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
I love endurance mechanically, but I hope they treat endurance as a mental thing fluffwise. Otherwise, it is a bit silly for people to drop to the floor because they are tired. People enter into shock due to blood loss, a serious injury, or being unable to cope with the pain. If they use endurance to represent someone's ability to keep their cool and go on that would be neat. Tie it to Willpower.
Grey Paladin on
"All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity; but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dream with open eyes to make it possible." - T.E. Lawrence
My only objection to the whole stamina thing is I kind of wish that when you ran out you just started taking wounds instead of passing out right then.
But that's the point. It's functionally your hit points for a fight. But they regenerate so you get to start the next fight at full or close to full "health". What they are calling your Health bar is set up to balance the fighting over multiple encounters. It sounds like it would feel more like D&D 4E the way encounter powers and HP comes back using player surges between fights. Without the option to take an extended rest every 2-3 encounters.
I like the health/stamina idea. Makes a certian kind of sense and I like the strategic implications involved.
The dialog options I like a lot too. Alpha Protocol did that. If you spent most of the game as a sarcastic character, other NPC's would react differently (ie pissing Maurburg off into a fight was awesome as hell). I'm kind of seeing it as you start off with a skill of 1 in charm, intimidate, bluff, ect. If make an early choice that is charm, you gain an automatic point in it. Later down the line, you may have a conversation that has a requirement of 6 intimidate, but since you spent the whole game as a charmer, your reputation is as a charmer, so you'd fail an intimidate check. But if there was a high level charm check, you'd get it.
Pretty much the same as AP really, but you can see your conversation stats instead of them being hidden.
I've got high hopes.
While I agree to an extent, I also think that just because you have a reputation as a charmer doesn't mean you can't intimidate someone. Like, for instance, that hobgoblin leader that lives in a cave. What is your reputation to him? If they want to assume that your character has no experience with any of it and learns as he goes, well then fair enough, but there's more to influencing people than just experience. Some of that is innate.
I always thought that maybe what gear you wear should have some affect on that kind of stuff.
I mean if I am wearing the God Armor of Screaming Souls and wielding the Demon Sword of Unmaking and some punk bandit tries to waylay me, I should be able to tell him to fuck off.
"Seriously kid, look at me. The freaking pauldrons of my armor are living skulls that eternally scream in agony. My sword swirls with dark energy and can cut the very fabric of reality. You just, you just don't wanna go down this road kid."
-Intimidate Check Failed-
"le sigh"
That reminds me of the missions in AP where they mocked you for wearing combat armor to a sitdown meeting
In general APs system would be pretty sweet in a sprawling RPG. Having the order you do things in affect the conversation and solution options is pretty great, and the dual system of intel (which could easily be called knowledge instead) and previous conversation picks / actions deciding what options are available to you is incredibly immersive.
It is more work to write though, not only because you'd need to craft your world more carefully (Which actions reflect what, where could a PC gain knowledge to solve problem X, how could he mess up and make a fight harder instead of easier), but you also end up writing more lines that players would never see. From looking at New Vegas, it's pretty clear that Obsidian didn't think many people would go the Legion route, since it's unique questline is relatively short and straightforward (From what I've read, I've never gone conquering slaver myself).
I will not be afraid of presenting unfinished or exploratory work to this community. This is not your typical game development and marketing paradigm. People have pre-paid to not only get a great game, in 18 months, but to also get a view (and in some cases collaborate) into the game development experience, now, and to the end. This update was clear right in the beginning, in spite of the humour, that we are in a foundational, groundworky, nitty-gritty stage. In order for us to be successful, we must build and test things in a very crude state. So that we maximize our time, all early asset development must be very flexible and easily edited to allow for rapid iteration. This is how we will effectively get to a state of confidence in scale and capability with respect to all visual features and performance, in the game. There is a natural order to game development. The initial steps are rarely shown to the public, because of the often less impressive aspect of it, and because publishers usually restrict access to game content in the early stages. More often, developers go "dark" for several months, sometimes years, before they show ANYTHING! We are, instead, embracing the complete "Kickstarter" experience that people have paid for. This kind of transparency comes with obvious risks: it takes time to assemble, write, and respond to updates and we expose ourselves to much greater criticism.
But make no mistake! We know that what people write and more importantly--how they write it--,says more about them than it does about us or what we are doing. If the feedback is relevant, thought out, and not abusive, it is far more likely to be considered by us as important and useful. Words that are vomited in hateful threads are tainted by drama and ego and are therefore useless to me. In the end, this game will be great! and everybody who contributed to the kickstarter will have been able to witness, why! If their feed back was "useful" then they might also see the part they played in this development experience, as well.
Art Direction of World and Creatures will be coming, but not this year.
Posts
- Maps are expected to be rendered up to 20k pixels wide.
Edit: Nesler. Not Nessler. Damnit.
That sounds.. huge. I like that.
I'm at the point of agreeing. I'm not a fan of Neogaf and especially not a fan of them when they meltdown about something but I think the *don't show if it's not ready* isn't entirly unwarranted as it was a bit naive to assume something like this wouldn't happen.
HOWEVER that thread begins to cross the line. And not pretty.
I mean, what?
At least 1-2 of the reasonable people in the thread are calling him out.
What does this mean?
Steam: BrocksMullet http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197972421669/
Steam: BrocksMullet http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197972421669/
Well, my monitor is 1920 pixels wide, so that means maps can be about 10x the size.
By map, do they mean level, or a paper world map thing?
Steam: BrocksMullet http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197972421669/
The current world area you are in.
The ratio is 6:9 so that would mean 20'000x30'000.
I wonder if they will do each city on one giant map.
Or each city in several giant maps.
I love the clueless implication that having a Chinese artist is somehow bad or low rent, lazily conflating it with the negative perception of Chinese manufactured goods. Like China is not full of incredible artists produced by Russian style traditional academies that would take a giant shit all over 99% of the accredited art schools in the West.
They mean the image file that represents the current "zone" you are occupying could be rendered at up to 20k pixels wide.
White FC: 0819 3350 1787
White FC: 0819 3350 1787
I love Obsidian showing us how they are making the game, I love the rough draft of the art, and I love how they are giving commentary so we understand better.
I want more of these.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Anyway, another interview with Sawyer by Iron Tower Studios (Age of Decandence)
http://www.irontowerstudio.com/forum/index.php/topic,3114.0.html
The dialog options I like a lot too. Alpha Protocol did that. If you spent most of the game as a sarcastic character, other NPC's would react differently (ie pissing Maurburg off into a fight was awesome as hell). I'm kind of seeing it as you start off with a skill of 1 in charm, intimidate, bluff, ect. If make an early choice that is charm, you gain an automatic point in it. Later down the line, you may have a conversation that has a requirement of 6 intimidate, but since you spent the whole game as a charmer, your reputation is as a charmer, so you'd fail an intimidate check. But if there was a high level charm check, you'd get it.
Pretty much the same as AP really, but you can see your conversation stats instead of them being hidden.
I've got high hopes.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
And it's inability to come out is what's killing ZRPG
While I agree to an extent, I also think that just because you have a reputation as a charmer doesn't mean you can't intimidate someone. Like, for instance, that hobgoblin leader that lives in a cave. What is your reputation to him? If they want to assume that your character has no experience with any of it and learns as he goes, well then fair enough, but there's more to influencing people than just experience. Some of that is innate.
Well, hopefully they'd be smart with the dialog checks. Say you have charm at 6 and intimidate at 2 and bluff at 3. You go peacefully into a golbins den to talk to the chief. To intimidate him, you'd need a check of 4. Now, if you fight your way through the golblin den and kill them all on the way to the chief, once you talk to him, his intimidate check would be 2, because your actions showed you're ruthless as fuck.
So a scaling dialog system that's a combination of experiance skills you gain from actually doing dialog checks, and then your actions towards a certian faction.
So if you spend the whole game murdering the Knights Who Say Ni, they probably won't want to negotiate with you later and would have a higher diplomacy check. If you give them rhetorical blow jobs, they'd be easier.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
I always thought that maybe what gear you wear should have some affect on that kind of stuff.
I mean if I am wearing the God Armor of Screaming Souls and wielding the Demon Sword of Unmaking and some punk bandit tries to waylay me, I should be able to tell him to fuck off.
"Seriously kid, look at me. The freaking pauldrons of my armor are living skulls that eternally scream in agony. My sword swirls with dark energy and can cut the very fabric of reality. You just, you just don't wanna go down this road kid."
-Intimidate Check Failed-
"le sigh"
Yeah, that would be pretty cool and it sounds like maybe a possibility.
The multiverse is full of idiots.
More souls to feed your pauldrons imo
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
But that's the point. It's functionally your hit points for a fight. But they regenerate so you get to start the next fight at full or close to full "health". What they are calling your Health bar is set up to balance the fighting over multiple encounters. It sounds like it would feel more like D&D 4E the way encounter powers and HP comes back using player surges between fights. Without the option to take an extended rest every 2-3 encounters.
3DS FC: 5086-1134-6451
Shiny Code: 3837
It is more work to write though, not only because you'd need to craft your world more carefully (Which actions reflect what, where could a PC gain knowledge to solve problem X, how could he mess up and make a fight harder instead of easier), but you also end up writing more lines that players would never see. From looking at New Vegas, it's pretty clear that Obsidian didn't think many people would go the Legion route, since it's unique questline is relatively short and straightforward (From what I've read, I've never gone conquering slaver myself).
The "lessons" of AP: Don't do anything in this game ever again because it will be unfairly savaged and sell like ass.
No wonder Chris likes Reddit.
"We have years of struggle ahead, mostly within ourselves." - Made in USA
No one's perfect?
Steam: BrocksMullet http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197972421669/
"We have years of struggle ahead, mostly within ourselves." - Made in USA