Gizmo

This matters? They should have no leverage on this issue; Obsidian is not selling the tools as part of the deal, and it cost them to create those tools. It was not a stretch goal, or I would of course agree; but here I don't see it. If somebody wants to mod the game, that's great; if Obsidian wants to help ~then whatever help they offer is also great, but they should not be obligated or thought ill of for not supplying their in-house tools... Any modder that is that serious, should call them and arrange a contract to use their in-house tools... and of course they might still decline. (And also because they will otherwise own that mod if they did supply the tools for free; it would be in the EULA.) I'd love to see an official toolset (even a stripped down one that crudely makes a few tasks slightly easier); but I won't me miffed if it doesn't happen; it was not ever part of the plan as far as I can tell.

Obsidian has already done deals with those tools; I don't think they should be expected or feel obligated to share something they devised and created. Now if they want to release a sample dialog file, with brief overview, and the option for users to replace the placeholder dialog, I think that would be incredibly awesome on their part... But their toolkit is for organizing an entire world of NPCs; no modder is likely to ever need that, and any modder that does, probably knows enough not to need it either.

Witcher 2 added a few things of interest, and got rid of just about everything I liked from the first game. Open world does sound depressing (for those that will actually look closely at it, and understand a bit of the limitations it will bring); but it IS CDProjekt, so... If it can be done well, I expect that it will be.

I'm curious; what was wrong with Witcher 2? (I've not finished Witcher 2) *Witcher(#1) ranks as the best RPG that I've played that was not published by Black Ilse. **I have several peeves with Witcher 2 already, but am curious as to what yours are. For my worst RPG.... It's a cheap shot to say Fallout 3; though it came first to mind... It's not the worst RPG I've played. I assume that the OP means worst cRPG; otherwise there are plenty of bad RPGs to pick from that were PnP games. The worst cRPG that I've played is... well... I can't say Oblivion either, though it came second to mind after FO3. Being the worst RPG, is not being the worst game, and neither Oblivion nor Fallout 3 are bad games IMO ~terrible RPGs though. I guess it would have to be either Lionheart or Inquisition... but to be fair, I didn't play either all the way through ~but wanted to, and that's the first tell right there that something is wrong with them. Lionheart had a great system, and fantastic premise... and seemed to fall flat with both, unless it got MUCH better after the part when I stopped playing it. Inquisition just couldn't hold my interest enough to keep playing. Goodness! I had completely forgot about that one! [Yes I'm not kidding, I did forget about it when trying to recall RPGs that I'd played.] Add Skyrim to my list; IMO it's a worse RPG than the others, but the best looking game of the lot. (Have to excel at something I suppose.)

Games that are designed not to be modded, are by definition, "mod unfriendly".

You're wrong. Complete tutorial will be super helpful. A complete tutorial ~if actually needed, probably won't be used; and certainly won't be something they will want to spend the necessary time on; not when they could be working on their next project instead. *If they release an intermediate or high level overview that shows just enough for an experienced modder understand it... then in depth user created low-level tutorials will come of it.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Legend of Grimrock use an engine developed in-house by Almost Human, so they are free to release whatever they want. PoE use the Unity engine, which does have a free version, but no open version, as far as I know. Obsidian can't simply release the tools that were provided to them by Unity when they purchased the pro license. And if I am not mistaken, they already said they plan to release their own file formats, or at least make them easy to edit with common tools. It's just that we won't get the tools they are using to create and edit those files. Anything that's custom and that might need an explanation. I don't mean anything that they can't give away. If they are using straight FBX models, there is no need to explain them, but if they have some strange "lighting-hint-file" (which they probably don't, but it's for example), then tell people what that is and how it works. They already have said that they have five information textures for a background; if it's not obvious what they are or how they are used, or if they are unconventionally made... mention that and how they are done; (for those that are interested). *That is unless they want them as technology secrets, but I can't imagine, unless they developed an awe inspiring industry solution, and they know it.

Is this because of a need for the premium features? Unity itself is free to download. Technically it should be possible to open a game to users with either custom made tools by the developers or by allowing them to use Unity itself (always the better option, IMO) as long as they don't release Unity source code it shouldn't be a problem. But I think they may be using UnityPro which would require them to develop the tools since I doubt modders are going to pay for it. This is essentially what I've gathered as well. In order to mod Unity easily, either you own the same version of Unity that the one used to make the game, or the developer release modding tools they build themselves. Unity's ease of use may have played against Obsidian in this case. I suspect that most of the tools they used when interacting with Unity are directly provided by Unity, or are modified version of tools provided by Unity, meaning they can't release any of them. This also means that they would need to build from scratch a worse version of what they already have in order to provide modding tools. These tools wouldn't be close in design to those used to actually make the game, so you could expect all kinds of problem. Open formats (all of them). Legend of Grimrock devs [Almost Human], provided a basic map editor and a modest reference page of their object definitions and script interaction [both in Lua]... that's it. But they then published their file formats. The community created scripting frameworks, and even TWO joint effort 3d model & animation convertor tools that can import standard formats and export game ready animation and model assets. [The model tools were mostly from just one clever programmer, IIRC with help from another's work on animation scaling.] There is no guarantee that that will happen here, but I'd think that it's not very unlikely. Provide the foundation and I'm fairly certain the fanbase will build on it. ** It should also be mentioned that AH are really cool guys that have even sat down and posted open call for easy editor features and coded the requests over a few beers while they sat there in the chat, and the results were in the next update! Obsidian are really cool guys right? (I know they are... I remember the hi-res Kotor2 cinematic replacement files they put up ~for free.)

Is this because of a need for the premium features? Unity itself is free to download. Legend of Grimrock also; they've got a thriving fanbase over there, and it's almost entirely the toolset. (The basic game is essentially 'Eye of the Beholder' or 'Dungeon Master'. There are mods for that game that build systems not found in the game that shipped; as well as custom 3D content and loads of custom maps.

Thanks very much for the direct reply. Building the map is not a problem, and sounds fun; Blender is free, and can bake that as textures... (Of course, I'd have to actually see a level and its parts to truly know the extent of the task.) It would be wonderful if someone at Obsidian (afterwards), can post an intermediate overview of the process... not necessarily an in depth tutorial in steps, but in general. ** Great video! (and answers a lot. )

It would be grand if they would later post a synopsis of the work involved, and highlight the most non-intuitive aspects with a bit of explanation about them.

Josh Sawyer mentions in one of the Kickstarter updates that the background are 2D, and then proves it by rotating the view in the engine. So are the backgrounds really 2D, or was that unintentionally misleading on his part? I of course get it, that he meant that cliffs, bridge, and the statues are not mesh shapes, but rendered textures... but it sure looks like they are mapped to a plane in 3D space; or am I mistaken? Are they using object normal map tricks for dynamic shading of the background plane, to make it seem a more complex shape than it is? The results are breath taking; but I'm curious of what will be needed from the potential modder planning to add an area into the game. Will prospective modders need to have a full 3D map to render, and render its object normals in order to have the same quality of lighting and shadows as the official area backgrounds. It doesn't seem like a traditional 2D artist could load a painting as a background and get that kind of shadowing from the light sources; or is it some sort of 'Riven-esque' AVI overlays that allow the lighting effects?

Developer tools would be fantastic... I'd love a modernized FO2 style editor and a Bam-Workshop equivalent; robust Lua scripting, and open formats. (A better UI than the FO2 editor of course.) Do we know if it uses FBX? I've been out of the loop for a while.

I certainly voted Turn Based; a really close fight all the way. I am partial to turn based, but would have voted RT/wP if the game had been a sequel to Planescape ~but it's not one. Doesn't seem to be Planescape related at all really, so I voted Turn based because there is no prior obligation to make it RT/wP.

It's been an old joke that the adventurers delve into the old caves and mines and return with untold riches and wonders... then spend fortunes in small towns and suddenly the locals are all millionaires [presumably]; or just some of them. One would think that there would be a class shift; sudden resentments, grudges... The Blacksmith has a fortune and can hire three at [exorbitant rates] from the neighboring towns (leaving them with none). He buys out all the month's timber to make an extension to his shop and forge... and none is left to repair the inn from after that awful sorcererous debacle them adventures had with that mercenary company ~the place ruined. Could not the excess gold be spent on (among other ~usual~ things)... fines from writs for damages, and tariffs. If brigands can perform highway robbery... why can't city government? But to this end: Could towns have a city coffer? and certain changes and 'upgrades' occur when they have enough money to do them? Could things not degrade when they don't? Eg. less city guards, less clean (seedier) cities; higher crime frequency. I liked [the] Baldur's Gate's methods, but I also liked Arx Fatalis' methods. I like that the player might buy what they cannot make ~until they can make it cheaper themselves; but IMO this should be a character (development) choice. IMO it's not punishing the players that don't use crafting to allow those who do to get gear cheaper ~they chose to develop crafting. I have seen neighbors throw away bicycles with a broken handbrakes ~and then go buy a new ones. If I pick up those bikes and fix the brakes... I get the bikes for the cost of the repairs, and of knowing how. The important thing is that the PC's with advanced crafting skills are not [should not be] spending all of their time practicing their own personal craft [ie. sword training; spell casting; slight of hand, religious rituals... for them those points are going somewhere else, and those that are [instead] have the option to become better skilled mages, paladins, and rogues because of it; so it's not really a free lunch after all. IMO item degradation becomes 'watching the clock' ~that's not good. In Arx Fatalis, the player can ignore item degradation until it becomes critical, and they get an icon of the critically damaged item. This works well in my experience. I would think that high-quality gear should degrade at a noticeably slower pace; perhaps some not at all (part of the enchantment).

I've always found it really bizarre and silly in games that you can just wander up to some blacksmith's forge, elbow him out the way, and start working. I'd really appreciate it if you actually had to gain the right to use these locations from their owners (options could be owning one yourself in player housing, paying to rent the use, included with board at inns, or being allowed access from a friend, for a few examples). Or... another option could be that the crafter works better with better tools. A crafter with full access to a magnificent workshop faring far better at their work than had they done it on some hamlet's back-yard anvil. And/but the PC might be allowed to carry a small [8 pound?] anvil for in the field emergency crafting ~~But that would only make sense if items degraded beyond damaged (which I wish they would). Here is an idea: What if items that made it to 'damaged' (or severely damaged), became vulnerable to breakage in heated combat with a better blade or mace; your heroes' damaged longsword snaps parrying the ogre's war-mace... Possible (or I should say probable, mostly because it was in such bad condition). A hero could stop [even mid-spelunking] and repair his equipment (with light-duty tools) to repair it enough to not likely break before they get back to town. **Speaking of breakage and my wanting items to potentially break... Arx Fatalis had [iMO] a grand repair and crafting system, that allowed for casting ore into ingots, and ingots into swords; and/or working blanks into blades on the forges, to just simple repair work. One thing though... In Arx Fatalis, the skill of the PC affected the quality of the repair; in many cases the PC could improve the item's condition, but incompetence would ultimately damage the item's maximum condition ~meaning that repeated repair work on the same item would render it [overworked] junk over time; unless they were master craftmen; [like the blacksmith was]. I like the idea that a PC's crafted magic weapon could run the risk of breaking if greatly neglected. I do recall times in Baldur's Gate 2 when my PC might have a weapon break, and them have to switch out for anything at hand ~even if they were unfamiliar with it. Like a grandmaster swordsman suddenly without a blade, and scrounges a mace; or lesser quality sword until they can get a new sword. Another aspect was that in BG2, there were creatures that could not be harmed by swords (or even magic weapons)... this would cause a great sword fighter to have to resort to a conventional mace to put dent them. Now imagine they are in the thick of it an their only non-magical mace breaks. Such a shift in tactics could never happen if the players were assured they would never lose any equipment.

It does. So does this mean that Skuldr will be blind to mechanical implements and/or NPCs? (or Undead?) _____________________ Everything about this project looks better and better.

DK1 was [is] my favorite of the two; but I really like DK2... The only real annoyance for me was that the walls could not be reinforced to impenetrable; or at least nigh impenetrable. Actually there was one more peeve, boulders crumbled after three or so bounces. Something that I missed in DK2 was the need to micro-manage the horned reaper(s!); each to their own [locked] apartments. **The minor annoyance was that with DK2 (and DK1/D3D), they lost the individual insect vision; hex-cell vision for flys, and the convex warped view for beetles.

It's not impossible, it's that you would have to install it on another computer to copy it... You cannot go to an access point and download your game to a flash drive to bring home and install. For some people that's a 40 mile drive into town ~perhaps even to the library. Steam games (like from Walmart) ship on DVD with an installer... Why can't Valve let you download that if you need to? ** More importantly ~It's the Updates! You get home (with your copied install after burning a favor from a friend or acquaintance), and Steam won't run the game without a massive patch... They should let you download local patch installers. That would at least allow people to grab their patches while in town and install them later when they get home.

If I had the option, I'd never have installed it ~but the FO:NV CE was wrapped in that crap and refused to install without phoning home; then trying to download the game instead of use the DVD. There are a multitude of reasons to hate this app, but the one that really bugs me is not the fault of the application at all ~it's Valve. Valve maintains a client application on all subscriber machines... Valve actively accepts payment for games that they know will not run on the machine used to make the purchase ~and they say nothing. I "bought" Troika's Vampire:Bloodlines for instance and it would not load. Valve tech support said to me (after two weeks wait) that I should remove one half of my computer's RAM (permanently) if I wanted to play the game I'd paid them for. This is their scripted reply... They couldn't mention it before accepting payment? "Are you sure that you want to purchase this title? Your PC has too much RAM and [insert game name] is known to not function on systems with that configuration." Or even "You would have to change your configuration or play it on another machine." Steam could poll the hardware and flag titles that would have known issues. They don't. I had to search for a user patch (possibly viral) ~but hey the game played just fine after that ~now why [the hell!] does Steam not offer a similar [but trusted] patch for a game they are all too happy to take money for? The other day my entire Steam library listed as uninstalled (meh... 15 games, but big ones). To try to play any of them started the re-download of the title ~when I could read all of the data as present on the disk; Valve had me do their script and nothing worked. Steam started downloading the games ~~and eventually it started acknowledging the installed files and the downloads were mainly Steam skipping files because they were already there... This was still a hassle and I regret every Steam purchase I've made; [or will make. Some titles just don't come without being stink-wrapped in Steam DRM]. This is the first thing I disable when I install Steam; I don't want the overlay, I don't need (or want) cloud storage ~hell I disable Steam Achievements in the games when I can. My other computer ~the only other place I'd login to Steam from~ is out in the sticks with no broadband... Steams' useless to me there ; and it means that I cannot access anything that I purch... subscribed to. Valve must consider any who live outside of broadband access to be insignificant and not worth speaking of, else they would allow Installs from Flash drives and/or have a dial-up connection mode for pure low-bandwidth authentication that doesn't slam you with gigabyte update patches; (or even small 50MB ones).

For me, it was probably Eye of the Beholder ~on someone else's Amiga; then later Pool of Radiance and Curse [of the Azure Bonds]. ** Actually, it was more likely Bard's Tale come to think on it; on someone else's Commodore 64.

Mostly Shadow Warrior, Disciples 2 and LA:Noire; in that order [amount].

Has anyone heard of, or seen this? (Talk about ripping off a name; or... could this possibly be accidental?)

Story-wise? (I couldn't stand the gameplay, and went back to playing the first one.) *I'm currently playing Painkiller and XIII.

Better still, I use Winrar to copy the game folder to a compressed archive. Has anyone (in the US) noticed that Walmart is selling Kotor & Kotor2 on the shelves lately? (bundled)