Pillars of Eternity

[volsung]

Sigh...

I do like awesome graphics />/> But I'm willing to sacrifice that in order to improve on the things we have lost over the years. Eventually, if things go well, I'd expect cRPG's to use excellent 3D visuals as well, but not at the cost of their defining elements. And still, there are things particular of this genre that still demand text />/>

But for now, let's ask Gary Gygax what he thinks the role of graphics is in a role-playing game like the one he created. Oh wait... he's dead. Hmmm...

I suppose his answer would be: "even though we used our minds before, I am sure the electronic computer can replace that especially since they're capable of projecting our thoughts into those tube panels called screens". Interesting that he called them tube panels, but hey it was probably back in the 1970's.

Well, you heard the man. On to the graphics revolution then.

-- Post edited. Don't want to stir more controversy by adding some acid humor that will surely be misinterpreted --

 

[Glaroug.531]

I was looking for an alternative to Skyrim. I was looking for an Open World with some proper story, memorable characters, good level design, reactive and interactive game world, meaningful choices, etc. I eventually read about TW series.

That! You just described me! So listen up spiritual Brother Blue!

I hated Skyrim and HATED Steam for requiring me to activate the game code on Steam so that I could no longer return the game. I was angry that I just went out of blew 60 bucks. But I wasn't going to let the game win. No! I was going to have my fun! Thankfully the creation kit came round and I made fun adventures for myself, had little stories in my head for different characters, formed stories lines and so on and enjoyed the sandbox experience/tools. Recently I learned the game that I should have bought was Neverwinter Nights, a game where I can make fun adventures for more easily using the Aura Engine tool set . O well. Then found Geralt and fell into his arms

Tomorrow marks 1 years since I bought the Witcher!

Blue, I don't think you'll like Planescape, Fallout, Baldur's Gate, etc. I KNOW you will LOVE them. I've no doubt you won't regret forking over the dough to dive into a fun and rich world and experience for yourself the wealth that make companies like Obsidian want to recreate those games.

Let's ask Gary Gygax what he thinks the role of graphics is in a role-playing game like the one he created. Oh wait... he's dead. Hmmm...

Too soon! Too soon! Have you no soul!

EDIT: What happened to the Wheel of Time game? Last I heard Red Eagle only planned on a mobile game but there was talk of a...*sour face* movie. I'm actually revealed PE is not a Wheel of Time game. I have such strong doubts that it could be done

 

[Sirnaq]

As a fan of both 3d and 2d approaches i need to say that both serve different purposes. You can't just say that 2d is objectively better than 3d, but you also can't say that 2d is objectively worse. It's just as silly as stating that playing boardgames with friends is objectively worse than going to cinema. 3d serves immersion, devs since beginning of gaming industry are trying to make more and more cinematic experience, and nothing wrong with that, with 3d you can make faster, more reflex based games. 2d serves imagination, you don't get to see everything, missing parts are replaced by you yourself. Also it's easier to make good looking 2d game than 3d. While i can stomach even early 2d games, i absolutely hate badly done 3d. Pity that some games shifted to 3d when technology was not there yet, i would enjoy neverwinter in 2d much more, same goes with neverwinter 2 actually.

 

[Agent_Blue]

That! You just described me! So listen up spiritual Brother Blue! />/>/>

I hated Skyrim and HATED Steam for requiring me to activate the game code on Steam so that I could no longer return the game. I was angry that I just went out of blew 60 bucks. But I wasn't going to let the game win. No! I was going to have my fun! Thankfully the creation kit came round and I made fun adventures for myself, had little stories in my head for different characters, formed stories lines and so on and enjoyed the sandbox experience/tools. Recently I learned the game that I should have bought was Neverwinter Nights, a game where I can make fun adventures for more easily using the Aura Engine tool set />/>/>. O well. Then found Geralt and fell into his arms />/>/>

Tomorrow marks 1 years since I bought the Witcher! />/>/>

Blue, I don't think you'll like Planescape, Fallout, Baldur's Gate, etc. I KNOW you will LOVE them. I've no doubt you won't regret forking over the dough to dive into a fun and rich world and experience for yourself the wealth that make companies like Obsidian want to recreate those games.




/>/>/> Too soon! Too soon! Have you no soul! />/>/>

EDIT: What happened to the Wheel of Time game? Last I heard Red Eagle only planned on a mobile game but there was talk of a...*sour face* movie. I'm actually revealed PE is not a Wheel of Time game. I have such strong doubts that it could be done />/>/>

I appreciate your candour.

You do however realize that, amongst others, I have played Lords of the Midnight, a 2D 8-bit adventure, Ice Wind Dale, 2D Isometric, and Heroes of Might and Magic, graphics wise, a most crappy 3D RPG?

I can tell you now I don't particularly miss Ice Wind Dale's graphical style.

I'd also venture into saying there are many fundamental disagreements between myself and hard core RPG players. For example, some of the basic tenets of the genre, I believe, are defective beyond repair, as I tried to illustrate with the chipped toenail allegory. In my perspective, we must move past orthodox RPG mechanics, abandon at least some portion of the canon, in order to deliver a more wholesome, challenging and in the end more satisfying gaming experience.

I'm not expecting this intellectual conflict to come to a resolution anytime soon.

It's one thing to say one is not keen on graphics. You shan't ever read a response of mine to that sort of personal confession. But it's an entirely different matter altogether to claim graphics are the least important aspect in video games.

That's ideology.

And it badly needs to be disputed.

 

[Guest 2091327]

That's not ideology, it's an opinion. Just like yours. Some prefer fancy graphics, and we happen to like other aspects of games more than bling-bling. That is why we are excited about Project Eternity and some other titles, because they are going back to a time when games were more than about graphics. That is an exaggeration of course, but there is a large portion of truth to it.

I don't understand why you two have to go on the warpath in this thread though. There is no lack of 3D games out there with great graphics, but there IS a lack of games out there with good RPG mechanics like we had in Planescape Torment and Baldur's Gate. Thanks to crowdfunding, there can actually be room for both now. Isn't that great?

 

[Agent_Blue]

That's not ideology, it's an opinion. Just like yours. Some prefer fancy graphics, and we happen to like other aspects of games more than bling-bling. That is why we are excited about Project Eternity and some other titles, because they are going back to a time when games were more than about graphics. That is an exaggeration of course, but there is a large portion of truth to it.

I don't understand why you two have to go on the warpath in this thread though. There is no lack of 3D games out there with great graphics, but there IS a lack of games out there with good RPG mechanics like we had in Planescape Torment and Baldur's Gate. Thanks to crowdfunding, there can actually be room for both now. Isn't that great?

It's ideology alright. There is a distinct difference between the two.

If you had bothered to read some of my previous posts, you would have noticed I applauded the crowdfunding venture. I think it's both a great means and a great end. While 2D Isometric old school RPGs might not spike my interest, I can certainly see the benefits in broadening the RPG offer and potentially raising the bar on storyline, characters and world reactivity.

Who's 'we'?

On this thread an awful lot of people keep using the pronoun 'we', first person plural. I'm left wondering whether there's actually more than one individual posting under the same username or if some faction operates in here.

Either way, it amuses the hell out of me!

This is a public internet forum. All members are free to post as they see fit.

 

[M4xw0lf.978]

We are we. The hive-mind collective of old-school-RPG lovers. We are legion.

 

[Agent_Blue]

We are we. The hive-mind collective of old-school-RPG lovers. We are legion.

/>/>

I was going to suggest a third hypothesis:

a Freudian slip.



Glad you cleared that up. It's a faction alright.


Like I said, it just amuses the hell out of me!

 

[Kaldurenik]

i guess by mean he meant "the people that backed the kickstarter"? Nah it could not be that

 

[Agent_Blue]

i guess by mean he meant "the people that backed the kickstarter"? Nah it could not be that />

Nah, it's a forum faction.

Take me to your leader.

Much more amusing.

 

[Kaldurenik]

Clearly.

Anyway im happy that we will see a game with some depth

 

[Username.]

Ultima VII looks spectacular. How does it compare to Planescape, or the Baldur's Gate Games?

If you can tolerate the awful combat Ultima VII offers the most interactive and reactive game world I've seen in an RPG.

 

[Agent_Blue]

Clearly.

Anyway im happy that we will see a game with some depth />/>/>/>/>

For the nth time:

The more games in general, and RPGs in particular, the better.
The more diversified the better.
The deeper the better.

I give this crowdfunding a standing ovation. I think it's a bold way to gather capital and I'm also hopeful Project Eternity, if hugely successful, might help put some pressure on other developers to catch up on the quality.

Nonetheless, as a game, it doesn't interest me. But that hasn't been the subject of my posts here. Debunking the mantra on graphics has been the subject of my posts here.

I wish Project Eternity the best of luck. May it sell by the millions and manage to secure a steady lineage of 2D isometric classic RPGs in the years to come.

 

[M4xw0lf.978]

There's also Wasteland 2, which is fully 3d

 

[Guest 2091327]

Debunking, ideology and other words you throw about. You sound like a 911 truth (sic) bloke. Please stop trolling this thread, we've had enough by now. You're not some omniscient being that is the be-all and end-all of Gamer Knowledge. You have your opinion, we have a different one. Stop being a dick about it.

You seem more than a little interested btw, since you and this other plunk is so hell-bent on destroying the interesting topic that this was once was.

 

[Agent_Blue]

If you can tolerate the awful combat Ultima VII offers the most interactive and reactive game world I've seen in an RPG.

I say we raise our voices and ask for a more reactive and interactive game world. Now that I come to think of it, there haven't been that many threads requesting that in TW3, have there?

 

[Aaden]

What seems to have been overlooked in all these posts about good graphics is the financial and production side of things.

A game developer has a more-or-less set budget and timeframe. That means that there has to be a trade-off between elements of the game to make it all work out. You can't possibly develop a game which features the best graphics possible, an infinitely large game world, great reactivity to everything that you or any NPCs do, deep fleshed-out characters for all the NPCs, a storyline that compares to the best Fantasy book series, etc etc, fill in more superlatives,... unless you have infinite time and budget.

What I (and probably most of this ominous 'we'-faction) would argue is that developers should aim for a cost-effective solution for graphics and focus their time and budget more on elements that are crucial for a genre. It's not about "2D is superior to 3D", it's more like "2D offers potential for very detailed and immersive graphics, while at the same time keeping costs considerably lower than an equally beautiful 3D counterpart". State-of-the-art 3D graphics are AWFULLY expensive to achieve - especially if you want a large and diverse game world with it (thus the need for the huge amount of recycling in most games, most evident in recent TES games, to keep costs bearable). This means that graphics will consume a large share of your budget and obviously less is left for other elements such as storywriting and gameplay conception.
I therefore think the use of budget should be shifted away from shiny graphics and towards the more important elements. When you're satisfied with how your game performs in the core disciplines and you've achieved what you aimed for in terms of story, characters, game world, reactivity etc, THEN you should think about the level of graphical fidelity you can achieve with your budget without endangering the aforementioned goals.

I'm not saying graphics don't matter and all games should look like in 1995, I'm just saying graphics should take a backseat. Graphics will evolve nonetheless, as technology progresses, good graphics become cheaper and budgets rise - slower maybe, but it will happen and without sacrifing the actual game for it.

 

[Username.]

I say we raise our voices and ask for a more reactive and interactive game world. Now that I come to think of it, there haven't been that many threads requesting that in TW3, have there?

NPCs having schedules and reacting to things you do, like calling the guards if you raid their drawers, would be a huge deal for me.

You raise a good point Aaden, but I also think that hardware limitations also come in to play.

 

[Agent_Blue]

NPCs having schedules and reacting to things you do, like calling the guards if you raid their drawers, would be a huge deal for me.

You raise a good point Aaden, but I also think that hardware limitations also come in to play.

I agree.

I seem to remember something along those lines in TW3, NPC schedules, but I could be mistaken.

 

[Agent_Blue]

What seems to have been overlooked in all these posts about good graphics is the financial and production side of things.

A game developer has a more-or-less set budget and timeframe. That means that there has to be a trade-off between elements of the game to make it all work out. You can't possibly develop a game which features the best graphics possible, an infinitely large game world, great reactivity to everything that you or any NPCs do, deep fleshed-out characters for all the NPCs, a storyline that compares to the best Fantasy book series, etc etc, fill in more superlatives,... unless you have infinite time and budget.

What I (and probably most of this ominous 'we'-faction) would argue is that developers should aim for a cost-effective solution for graphics and focus their time and budget more on elements that are crucial for a genre. It's not about "2D is superior to 3D", it's more like "2D offers potential for very detailed and immersive graphics, while at the same time keeping costs considerably lower than an equally beautiful 3D counterpart". State-of-the-art 3D graphics are AWFULLY expensive to achieve - especially if you want a large and diverse game world with it (thus the need for the huge amount of recycling in most games, most evident in recent TES games, to keep costs bearable). This means that graphics will consume a large share of your budget and obviously less is left for other elements such as storywriting and gameplay conception.
I therefore think the use of budget should be shifted away from shiny graphics and towards the more important elements. When you're satisfied with how your game performs in the core disciplines and you've achieved what you aimed for in terms of story, characters, game world, reactivity etc, THEN you should think about the level of graphical fidelity you can achieve with your budget without endangering the aforementioned goals.

I'm not saying graphics don't matter and all games should look like in 1995, I'm just saying graphics should take a backseat. Graphics will evolve nonetheless, as technology progresses, good graphics become cheaper and budgets rise - slower maybe, but it will happen and without sacrifing the actual game for it.

I see your point.
But you also seem to be overlooking two very important aspects:

1) When working on an established franchise, Dev teams are already structured. So if there are, say, 10 senior graphic programmers on board, what do you propose? Them moving on to work on quest design? Character backstories?

2) Developing a game is a costly venture. Allocating more resources to development areas which may not attract that many buyers might not prove to be the wisest decision if the series is to continue.