descalabro

I'm glad with the way this game is looking so far but we really need to realize there are enough games with a classical/non-firearm setting already. In fact the only good reason I see for this game to be set in a classical type of world is the nostalgia factor, because otherwise there is still a huge postmodern/futuristic world with lots of technological/visual/plot possibilities craving for some creative team to explore (Fallout 3 wasn't the answer to it either).

Well, I think BG2 had a great number of remarkable locations, and most of them seemed to be designed with a lot of attention, but I think the "problem" was that they were so many, so it's generally easier to remember Durlag's Tower (which was the first mega-dungeon in a IE game) and places like Dorn's Deep or the Modron Maze (or Castle Maluradek for the ones who played it).

You people need to realize that virtual instruments (or Virtual Studio Technology) are NOT imitated instruments. They are recorded from instruments played by hi-grade musicians with the best microphones, in suitable locations and mixed by professional audio engineers with the best technology available. If they are used properly, we get results very close to the real thing and we save a lot of money. So I don't really see why it is of such an importance that the score of this game is recorded live.

Looks great, now let's hope they don't make everything static like in IE games.

Well, fighting within a small space is a good challenge.

I can't remember well, but I thought party members in IWD couldn't be revived when the character's body was destroyed (like on BG games). Can anyone confirm this?

I don't think this is very important nowadays. It's 2012, 2014 when they release the game; they don't need to cut on disk space or resources to have better graphics than all of those games (regardless of the graphic style)

There should also be items hidden inside very narrow spots on treeholes, or under rocks or inside table legs the way we had in IE games. Those were really cool to find, but I think they shouldn't be highlight-able like they were in IE games. They should be either found with the use of trap detection or simply by noticing something strange within a particular spot on the scenery. I found a few this way in IWD and IWD2.

People, you should stop complaining about how this isn't going to help the game. The 4 million are not for the beards, but for the game. The beard isn't a stretch goal, it's just a way to get more funds. And it would probably cause a less stressed workflow. These are good initiatives because they brake work routine, workers usually become better humoured (sorry for my bad English).

You know... you can just filter the topics on this forum so that polls appear first.

I'm glad to see "Bearmen (Wookies, Pandaren, etc.)" has the least votes. This is not freakin' Star Wars or WoW.

I'm portuguese and I would specifically order the game in English if it was translated into Portuguese. I hate translated/dubbed games and movies. But I understand many people don't know enough English to be able to play a game with a lot of text, so I hope everyone gets their needs satisfied.

27 BG 2 IWD 2 PS:T FO 2

I voted for "Once Finished I’m Done.", simply because I barely have time to play videogames.

I'm ok with the animations (there's a poll about this), and I'm ok with having the possibility to have the PCs saying some line when they kill the enemy, but I want to be able to turn them off if I find them annoying. When I played IWD I had very minimal speech activated for my characters.

I voted for "Random brutal death animations, like FO or BG", but not so random that when you kill a wolf with a critical hit it explodes human legs and arms like it did on later Infinity Engine games. FO was perfect on this aspect, but it was turn-based so it was a lot easier to have the proper animations for each creature back then.

They constructed as 3D models, yes, the same way IE games were. And these were made by one person only, with his own money. So I don't think that will be a problem with 2 or 3 persons to do all the 3D modeling work.

A lot of people will buy and upgrade computers between now and 2014. The Witcher 2's recommended specs will represent a fairly dated computer by then. An isometric view is just a projection, and a real-time rendering approach can use whatever projection desired including, but not limited to, an isometric one. That said the only difference between a pre-rendering and a real-time rendering approach is the time and place when the rendering happens, not the style or quality of the graphics. That's the point I'm trying to make. A technology is not an aesthetic. I use my computer to work most of the time. If I can play a game once in a while that's great. I'm not counting on upgrading mine because it's a mac mini and I hope it will last long as it is. And to play Project Eternity I won't need to upgrade it. I don't care if it's pre-rendered or rendered in real time, as long as it's isometric and as long as it is not tiled. In Commandos 2 and 3 you could do 90 degrees turns with the camera, I think, and I'm also fine with that, and I'm fine with zooming too (the game WILL have zoom, as F. Urquhart stated). I just don't want it to look like 3D RPGs look nowadays, because the isometric charm is lost, and they look bulky unless you have the required hardware. If the methods you indicate are the best to make the game look great the way I'm saying, then I'm all fine with them; but I suspect that rendering highly detailed graphics in real time this way is the same as zooming The Witcher out and locking the camera at an almost isometric view, which I suppose requires a lot of processing power, because this way you'll have much more in-screen elements to render. I do like animations (which IE games lacked often) and dynamic lighting, but I'm really fond of highly detailed true isometric gameworlds.

I completely agree with you, it's all about the style. Looking at locked isometric games reminds of how I felt when looking at those small house models at real estate stores when I was little. It has a char of its own.

An isometric projection doesn't imply or require the use of 2D backgrounds. The problem with 2D backgrounds is that the camera is forever locked to a certain orientation and plane. A 3D game that uses an isometric projection could allow rotating the camera, allowing the player to see all sides of a building for instance. It could also simply default to that projection but also allow arbitrary camera movement for cutscenes or just observing the scenery as one pleases. This is an issue now because today's screens have widely varying resolutions and PPIs. To give the game roughly the same scale on all screens will require zooming in and out of pre-generated bitmaps which is inherently imperfect and worse than generating the picture at the correct resolution natively from 3D model data. So if you will take the time to build 3D meshes of your environment to simulate dynamic shadows and lighting, why not use these to do the actual rendering. 3d-on-2d (beyond divinity, rise of nations) has always looked off because of the differences in lighting and resolution: you can easily tell what's being rendered in real-time and what's not. A full 3d render doesn't suffer from such inconsistensies. Sure, the developers could go to great lengths to produce this highly refined hybrid technology that manages to hide the seams perfectly, but why all this complexity when you could just do everything in 3d in the first place. Well that's simply wrong. We can do something that looks much better than the IWD and BG backgrounds in real-time 3D today, on hardware that most gamers already have. The Xbox 360 which is hardware from 2005 currently does high-detail, fantasy artwork that is higher resolution than anything seen in IE games: (Trine 2) Or in a more realistic style: (The Witcher 2) These are technically superior in every conceivable way to the 2d backgrounds we've seen in IE titles. They may not have the same style, because that's not what the artists were aiming for, but there's no question that the same style cannot be achieved, and in much greater detail, using real-time rendering today with cheap and widely available hardware. Don't mix style and technology. People also tend to ignore that IE's static backgrounds had several shortcomings: - They could not represent depth convincingly at all - it was a stretch of the imagination to picture yourself moving up or down in space even in areas that attempted to depict mountains - They were generally terrible at representing any dynamic surfaces - the "flowing lava" in Icewind Dale and IWD2 was jarringly static for instance, water was always another issue. Icewind Dale was a good setting for the technology precisely because everything was frozen... - The lighting was not convincing at all The first image you have there feels bulky, the second one is great, and both of them require a lot more hardware power than the way Obsidian is planing to do it (unless the programming is terribly bad). The Witcher 2 Recommended Specs: Processor: Intel Quad Core or AMD equivalent Graphics Card: Nvidia GeForce 260, 1 GB memory / Radeon HD 4850 with 1 GB memory Memory: 3 GB for Windows XP / 4 GB for Windows Vista and Windows 7 Hard Disk: At least 16 GB of free space I can't play this, and I'm not buying/upgrading my computer. No one here will, because that's not the point in Project Eternity. Besides, you can't compare a console to a computer in terms of gaming. I agree with you about the lava in IWD and IWD2, very often I wished it wasn't static (and they animated it in one small place inside Dorn's Deep), but (again) it's 10 years later, games like Commandos 2 and 3 don't have any problems with animations and they look great. Even STASIS, the one-man-self-funded game looks good enough and has great animations. But that's not the point anyway, the point is people like me and other users here enjoy locked isometric view because it's a style on its own, it's a way of looking into the game world, it's a video game art form and aesthetic current in videogaming, the same way 3D is. I think this is what you're missing.

I'm lefty and I think this is completely irrelevant and a waste of developers' time.

The creator of STASIS also created his own view of Wasteland 2, check them here: http://www.stasisgame.com/wasteland-ideas/ (be sure to zoom them!) One commenter said: "Man you should send them to Brian Fargo and collaborate with his team. Those “ideas” are ****ing awesome." Chris, the author, answered: "I have had the pleasure of speaking to Brian Fargo, aswell as the members of his art team-and I have no doubt that what they are doing will blow us out of the rad-infested water!" I think he's just being nice. Wasteland 2 looks nice, but this looks fantastic.

Having the camera restricted to a defined plane is still the best way to manage tactical combat. I think the lighting was pretty good in IE games, specially the later games. I was always amazed by how PCs and NPCs responded to the light around them. But I do agree that the shadows did not correspond. I too am in favour of animations to enhance atmosphere, and the STASIS and the noir game video seem to prove blending animations isn't as much of a problem as it was back then. And if there's any doubts just play Commandos 2 and 3. Those games are almost 10 years old and they had perfectly implemented animations in the scenery. And isometric graphics are a style of video game art, an aesthetic flavour most of us enjoy. People should stop comparing them to 3D on the basis that they're less advanced. That's not the point.

Eh, actually too many things today lack multiplayer, unless you are counting the multiplayer only games, such as WOW, SWTOR, etc. For example, KOTOR 1&2, DA 1&2, as well as ME 1&2 did not have multiplayer. On the other hand, in the past more things used to have multiplayer: BG 1&2, IWD 1&2, Arcanum and NWN all had multiplayer. Still I think he's right on this one: there are A LOT of multiplayer oriented RPGs already.

BG2's graphics have aged quite well. Granted, the sprites are less than beautiful, but the towns and the landscapes look much better to me now than many older games with 3D graphics. I think the "painted" look may end up being a little more durable than attempts at photorealism. Honestly, I feel like the IE games hold up better than games from two years ago. 2D art simply never becomes obsolete. I'd prefer it if this game went more in the direction of the original IE games than a lot of what I'm seeing suggested / expected. Flat, simple pictures of fantasy realms are more than good enough for me. I love pre-rendered isometric settings, but "Flat, simple pictures" is what I hope NOT to find in this game. Even IE games had some animated elements and an abundant use of dynamic lighting so I hope this game will be a step forward from that. Anyway, the images and videos on this topic show just how much of this is possible even with a small budget.