C2B

Part 2 http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/02/16/obsidian-on-project-eternity-kickstarters-future/

Rocksteady is working on a Batman game. Arkham 3 however it isn't.

I really don't see it as an indication of anything, and I can see how some people in the industry might even describe the exaggerated style of the Arkham game as "highly realistic". And that's not necessarily an art style Obsidian would have to follow if they had to work on a Batman game, which to be honest, I still can't quite see as feasible. But who knows! That's why I'm not talking in *have to's*. At all. Again, not absolutes. *Likely* Not *definitily*. Look my reasoning is the following 1. - If it was a Batman game, what Artstyle would MORE LIKELY be used for it? According to Batman's nature and previous games the answer would be *exaggereted* to *comically*. 2. - According to info we have that again LIKELY (not definitly because we don't know it) is related to this project it will use a highly realistic graphical style. I just really don't see how the statement *The highly realistic approach does make a batman game a bit more unlikely" is such a stretch when we are talking about a property that A: Has its origin in graphic novels B: So far, in its gaming related history majorly didn't feature a *highly realistic* artstyle. I'm not saying this disproves a Batman game.

Yep, and that's why I said it makes Batman less likely. It's a bit weird if a highly realistic graphical style is specifically a need for a Batman game, isn't it? And again, I'm not talking in absolutes here. Just making an observation.

Unlikely, certainly, at this stage though everything is by default unlikely as there's so little info- there's a better than even chance that it isn't anything that has been suggested. To be honest I'd suspect that WB is looking to a similar system to the alternating Treyarch/ IW CoD releases aimed at annualising the Batman games, so I'd also suspect anything coming out will follow the safe and profitable formula, not take a detour into RPG land. I could of course be wrong, and it would be potentially very good news for Obs if I am. Don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting the Batman franchise. I'm merely suggesting WB as a publisher due to process of elimination. It is more likely on account of what Feargus said than Square Enix. What would speak against Batman is the highly realistic part in the job postings. IMO, I consider them (the job postings) to be the most credible of info we have so far, the timing's just to perfect.

Thats very unlikely Warner Bros is possible because Feargus mentioned the companys they talked to in the Kotaku interview and its the odd one out.

Checking out the rpg codex thread for the interview just made me realize that its likely Warner Bros is the publisher for this (They argued a Batman game) Why? Well, in the Knights interview mentioned the following companies they have talked to - Ubisoft (After the South Park change, Feargus mentioned they had to make their contacts at Ubi first) - Lucas Arts and Bethesda (Lucas Arts we know what they have pitched and Bethesda was also mentioned)

The ordered blueprints do suggest a real-life setting.

Three hints by the way (Originally written on the PA forums) 3 is just a random tweet, BUT considering both postings in 2 were released on december 21 suggests that they are related to this project (as it makes sense for Obsidian to hire people in reaction of the contract being signed). And *highly realistic* does sound Cryenginy. Game in Spirit of AP? Speculation time *Buahahahahhah*

Considering I just mistook Penny Arcade for RockPaperShotgun I REALLY need some sleep. Edit: No, mistook RockPaperShotgun for Penny Arcade. What the hell is wrong with me.

So the contract for the new game was signed in december. It's also nice to hear Obsidian's doing well! Congratulations developer bros!

First Part. Future of RPG's. http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/02/15/obsidians-urquhart-on-the-future-of-rpgs/

So the control scheme was different because the game was no longer point and click except the only thing that made it no longer point and click was the different control scheme. Got it. DS3 was the definition of a Diablo clone; changing the control scheme didn't suddenly turn it into a brand new genre. No it wasn't the definition of a diablo clone. It was the definition of a gauntlet/Dark Alliance/Champions clone. It's not 1:1 gameplay, because its gameplay made for consoles. For the hunderth time, a lot of more things would have needed to be changed, including UI and Gameplay (Especially how ability selection works) to adapt fully diablo style controls without it going wrong.

DSIII was in a big part conservative because it had a for a recent AAA production a really small budget. I've been sayin' it for a while, but if you pay attention when you're playing you really notice all the corners they saved money on.

? They do not use the infinity engine. No. What dev entry do you mean? You probably misread making backgrounds and ruleset in spirit of the infinity engine.

The point and click aRPG genre hasn't change since Diablo; how hard was it to just rip the control scheme from that game(or one of it's dozen or so clones). DS3 was the most direct example of a straight console to PC port I've ever seen; they did the absolute bare minimum to make it playable on the PC and called it a day. Hell, it makes Borderlands' awful menu system look like it was lovingly handcrafted for the PC. Still no. There are plenty of *more direct* examples. What about ports that don't have resolution options or only feature button descriptions ingame. There are even ports that didn't even have all the button bindings added to the pc version making certain actions impossible. Yes, this happened. Different Gameplay. DSIII compared to its predecssors is more similiar to Dark Alliance/Gauntlet than Diablo. A straight port of the point & click control system wouldn't have worked much better. Again, would have needed substantial changes in UI and Gameplay. I do think it could have been better handled still.

They took a genre that started on the PC and has had the same control scheme for 15 years and made it unplayable without a controller. I can get requiring a controller for the PC version of Devil May Cry or something, but for a point and click aRPG? That's about as lazy a port job as you can get. The gameplay wasn't the same as the previous games though? And no, that still doesn't make it the laziest port ever. Not by a long shot. Edit: It was geared towards controllers of course, yes. Especially on the budget they had better PC controls (Which needed a lot more changes like UI and even gameplay) was more or less out of hand.

Except DS3 was "clean" at the expense of the PC release which was one of the worst port jobs I've ever seen in a game. ? Then you haven't seen many PC Ports. At all. The only main issue with it was the keybinding, and that was patched in. It wasn't buggy either. To name: Every (older) Capcom and Konami port. Dark Souls.

You can always blame the publishers if its appropriate. And if you actually would inform yourself about the specific development you would see where the problem lied. Internal or External. In KOTOR 2's case it was overambition for what was essentialy only a short contract. Yet, its still mostly on the publisher because of how he has given them more time and then cut that time surprisingly. Leaving Obsidian to wrap up very quickly. To make a short list of Obsidian's games and where the blame (mostly) lies (IMO), though in all cases its more or less both) - KOTOR 2 (Publisher) - NWN 2 (Obsidian) - Alpha Protocol (Obsidian) (Special case, as SEGA completly ****ed up the release and patch support) F:NV, while it's quite buggy there is really no *blame*. It was made under a tight window (18 month) with a known buggy engine. Publisher supported well. (Of course, the issues are still serious) DSIII wasn't buggy at all. Actually one of the least buggy crpgs I've ever played. Obsidian does take a lot of blame, but they stand to it. (It's the fans that complain). And constantly tries to improve themselves. They are not more buggy than Bethesda (arguable less) and if they continue from DSIII they actually could stand as the more stable rpg dev in the industry.

Eh Do think the faults in Bethesda games could be pointed out a lot better. Also, personal preference, the constant comparison of casual gamers = little kids just got me annoyed. But then again, I'm annoyed at the comparison in general. There's plenty of kids that find there way into more complex games and end up liking them and 18+ year olds that complain about not having their hand being hold.

And Junction Point bit the bullet as well. Wonder where Warren Spector is going next.

HD Remake of ROK got announced. Well of Blades of Destiny at least http://www.pcgames.de/Das-schwarze-Auge-Die-Schicksalsklinge-PC-249135/News/Das-Schwarze-Auge-Schicksalsklinge-Neuauflage-der-Nordlandtrilogie-angekuendigt-1046051/

You're assuming worst case scenario when any of these three really aren't implented like that at all.

I'm also still wondering who currently leads the South Park project.