Nathaniel Chapman

Hello nerdlings, I'm here to deliver the non-essential "hey this probably won't get me fired" goods on ONYX. We've actually taken what is a pretty long term strategy with it, so there are two layers. There is a core layer that contains all of the very, very low level stuff, including the renderer. Many aspects of this layer are customizable based on platform - so, for instance, it's a D3D renderer on PC/360 and... libgcm I believe on PS3. You'd have to ask one of the crazy men behind the curtain on our tech team for exact specifics. Things like the math libraries, memory managers, etc. also commonly have different implementations for each console as they support different SIMD instructions, have different memory architectures, etc. This stuff forms the foundation of any game we'd build with Onyx, but you wouldn't have a game if you just took that stuff. But, for the most part, you can chop off everything above this lower layer and migrate it from one project to the next, meaning nothing in this low level layer is dependent on any specific aspect (or game code) of any game we are making. There's some other things that live down in that low-level code - things like VFX (particles, billboards, etc.), physics, sound, etc. On top of this sits the game code, which does pretty much everything else. Input, animation, what makes up a level, RULZ, all our code to dumb down the game for XBOX, etc. lives in that layer. Actually, for the most part, the game code doesn't really know or care what system it's running on - the low level code is supposed to take care of all that. Some of that code can migrate from game to game, but that's where stuff gets tricky. In a lot of cases, things get tangled up enough that it's tough to make a clean break when you are starting a new project. This is why something we've been doing is making a new "modular game" layer that contains the platonic ideal of all of the generic things that you need to make the kinds of game we make. So, for instance, take a system like Inventory. Think of the things that Diablo, Fallout 1-3, BG1/2/IWD and Warcraft 3 all have in common with respect to Inventory, the concept of what an item is, etc. This is the kind of code that would live in this "generic game layer". Then, we can build on top of that to develop the specific rules for game X.

I'd be surprised (depending technically, I suppose, on when you consider the decade ending) if you didn't hear more by the end of this decade!

I find the replacing only a few icons tends to work better. Most people I've tried this with tend to figure it out pretty quickly when none of the icons work, but when it's only a couple icons they tend to get tripped up much more. Takes longer before they get hit by it, but the delay is worth it. And this is why you always lock your desktop when you leave your desk, people.

You shouldn't have to wait that long.

That's a leftover from Aliens. SKREEEEEE is the sound that aliens make!

I don't know why, but Obsidian is really pretty restrained when it comes to ludicrous pranks. Outside of the obvious ones, like tape over the sensor on an optical mouse, or screenshotting someones desktop, putting the screenshot as their wallpaper and hiding away all their icons. Actually, late in Storm of Zehir I decided that I was going to accumulate a pyramid of diet coke cans and not recycle them until the game shipped. It ended up growing about four or five feet tall, and mysteriously ended up on Tony Evans' (lead designer) desk. I also created my own mod where I swapped out the main theme music for Tony's theme by the Pixies. But nothing as elaborate as filling someone's office with sand.

I can guarantee everyone involved that I am not lead systems designer on a Twilight game. I cannot confirm or deny rumors re: sparkling in the sun.

http://www.irontowerstudio.com/forum/index.php?topic=338.0 By this definition, I could argue that The Sims is a CRPG - though I guess it depends on how broad a definition of narrative you're going with. Emergent narrative is, of course, a relatively out-there field but I think it's reasonable enough to argue that it counts. However, I think that Mass Effect certainly fits the definition you provided. I also think that your definition is far too narrow to reasonably encompass the RPG genre as a whole - though it's a pretty good definition of CRPGs.

Does that exclusively encompass plot-related choice? What about gameplay choices? If the answer is yes to the first, that excludes a lot of games that many (most?) would consider RPGs, including Darklands and many of the old Gold Box games. Additionally few RPGs provide "real" choice - most simply provide the illusion of choice but still take you through the same essential story regardless of your choices. Not to knock them - I love RPGs (duh) but I think you may be misrepresenting the difference between, say, the level of choice in Mass Effect and the level of choice in other games.

I've been playing with it some, it's pretty enjoyable. Seems to move fast and everything. Though having Monty play a psychopath does make it a little more fun...

this thread is kinda creepy imo

Actually, that's what we thought at first, too - but WotC kindly informed us that they are, in fact, feathers, and that wyverns are feathered. So feathers they got

I do know Adam Brennecke, programmer extraordinaire, came to us from Digipen. I actually don't know much about Full Sail.

First off, I was not lying, have never lied to you guys, and have no intention of lying in the future. What I did was respond to someone who said that the OC was going to be "pared down". I felt that was innacurate. Someone brought up the 20+ hours estimate, and that stuff had been cut since that estimate was made. The assumption being that we'd be left with a 10-15 hour OC. That is not the case. First, 20 hours was a pre-production estimate made BEFORE any significant amount of the game was completable. Obsidian QA's current estimate was what I posted. I probably won't make any specific future posts on the subject, but if that estimate changes I'm sure we'll release further information about it. Or, if you're really concerned about it, you can always find out how long the game will be from reviews. I want to stress that regardless of how many hours you complete the campaign in, it is NOT a short campaign. You visit a lot of different places, pick up lots of companions and have interesting interactions with them, complete many quests, etc. etc. A significant amount of content from cut areas has found its way into other areas, and IS in the final product - and some content has even been added since the 20+ hour estimate was made. I can understand people being skeptical, but you have to understand the position I'm coming from. It's not my job to hype the game - I'm a QA manager. I was simply providing what information I can and trying to explain the difference in the original target for the length of the campaign and what we are seeing in QA.

Why would a developer add the extra costs of internal QA for the first two thirds of a project, when QA isn't really all that useful at that point beyond a couple of dedciated testers?

I have to say, I think they did a really good job on the Thieves' Guild quests.

I have to say, I really like Oblivion overall but I dislike the way they handled scaling. It just doesn't feel epic to go into a cave, kill a bunch of vampires, then walk outside and get my ass handed to me by an uber-levelled mountain lion. It's also made the game SUPER hard for my stealth character, which is getting pretty frustrating.

I hate to be a downer, but I think the only way RPGs are going to have significantly better combat animations is if the number of base weapon types available are greatly reduced. That's one reason KOTOR had far superior animations to, say, Neverwinter Nights - there's basically five, maybe six weapons animation sets (One-handed Blade, Double-ended Weapon, Dual-Wielded Blades, Single-handed Blaster, Two-Handed Blaster and Double-Wielded Blasters). NWN had to support Axes, Clubs, Whips, Exotic weapons and all other kinds of craziness. And, when it comes to animator time, you can either spend time making a lot of different animations for a few base weapon types, or relatively few animations for a lot of different weapons. Personally, I think the balance will be shifting towards fewer weapons, as the large variety of weapons in a D&D game isn't necissarily that exciting - five different ways to deal 1d6 aren't always necessary, and DR doesn't factor into the equation often enough or in interesting enough ways to make including every single weapon type from the PHB worthwhile. On the other hand, something like Fallout is great because you can have a ton of different weapons that use similar animations.

Hmm, I see UC Irvine has not yet graduated to those new gas-plasma textbooks I keep hearing about.

I always have a difficult time understanding complaints about length... wouldn't you prefer a shorter overall game that had deeper content rather than a longer, less polished game? I mean, for example, Fallout was not a very long game, honestly. 10-15 hours probably my first time through. If it had been 30-40 hours but didn't have as many choices or as much branching content, I think that would have been significantly worse.

I don't think you understand the point. Simply because one likes or dislikes a certain novel does not imply that they believe that everything about that novel is perfect, or that they believe that all works should emulate that novel. For instance, I think Lolita is one of the greatest books ever written. That does not mean that I think games should include long sequences where the characters travel across the story's setting with little or no conflict. I enjoy aspects of the novel and the fact that I like it doesn't really mean anything as to what kinds of games I might want to make.

Typically you can tell if it's us online because we use the [OEI] prefix. Of course, anyone could use it, but if you see a bunch of guys labelled [OEI] chances are it's us.

We actually do have a pretty cool coffee machine, but it is neither rigged nor haunted.

Don't you find it dull? I think you do, as you've obviously tried very hard to cover up as much as you can with the unnecessarily large wall chart and the little pictures and so on, but the underlying blandness still oozes through. This room is crying out for colour, or potted plants at the very least. Those doors really are unnervingly high. They must be difficult to open with so much air resistance. Perhaps it's an earthquake-proofing feature? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah, I was joking. The Wall Chart is actually pretty important, though. I wouldn't make it too angry if I were you.

Your office has bland decor and high doors. Just thought I'd mention it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> How could we work in a building with fantastic decor and tiny doors? We couldn't fit into our offices! The bland decor inspires our desire to create and explore lush, interesting worlds in our games.