Frenetic Pony

What about occasions where a large battle is understood to be taking place around you, but your party still only faces the normal amount of enemies at a time, as is the case at the end of many RPGs? I don't know if the plot of Project Eternity will require such an event, but if it does are you confident that you'll be able to evoke the feeling of large armies clashing? Thinking about it, you could fake it well enough with the forced isometric perspective. Have npc's fleeing a city, have sounds all around you, fireballs coming in from off screen, come across a battle with some a couple allies every once in a while, face 20+ enemies at once maybe. If it was called for.

Playtest all the dialogue! Sit some random (RPG player) down, have them go through some dialogue area doing everything. Sit back and watch how they react, then ask them what they thought, then re-write anything that seems off. Iterate iterate iterate, it's what you do in game design, it's what Pixar does with it's movies (just about the only movie studio that does). Valve sits there and has people play through each section of their games, totally un bothered or helped, just so people can watch what they do. I don't see any reason the same wouldn't work with dialogue heavy sections of PE.

Probably not a real problem, games have been doing good 40 character battles for a decade now, and as far as a battle you'd participate in that's about what you'd want to max out anyway. As long as there's low enough level of detail settings for characters and high enough minimum spec it'll be fine. Still, leave interactive, good looking LOTR style battles for some uber expensive next gen action game.

There's PC's that have 16+ gigs of ram, 6 gigs of video ram, and are nearly triple the GPU power of the PS4, not including SLI/Crossfire stuff. There's no question it can be technically done. But then you come across removing bodies in a lore manner. I.E. whenever it makes sense story wise. Obviously a body in the middle of a city will be removed far faster than one decomposing in the middle of nowhere. Which means there'd need to be some sort of "body removal" variable programmed for each area. Which while minor to accomplish, is just another thing to do for each and every area for a rather silly little detail. As for physics, you'd have to think of minimum specs, collision is expensive (relatively). Realistic collision tied to animation might be really cool for a PS4 game, but I'm pretty sure the PE team would rather have less work and lower min specs than a bunch of "Corpse physics" to deal with.

The dev's idea of "bonuses only!" is classic game design, it's still a "negative" from a certain perspective, but it's a positive from the player's perspective and that's what matters! Still, like I asked is there going to be a class good at specializing in multiple weapon categories I wonder? If they stick with the "all people can use weapons well enough" it might not really matter, which might not make it as interesting of course. Thanks for the quotes BTW! Hadn't seen those.

I can actually speak to this professionally! I'm an econ major, and different currencies for different areas are worthless for most people. Unless you are an obsessive trader, and the currency exchanges fluctuate, and you want to profit off that, the idea is pointless. "But what if buying X is cheaper in rubie shells than in murdoc husks" most players? Either you just exchange murdoc's for rubie's and buy it, which just ends up taking more time. Or exchanging one type of money for another costs YOU money, in which case the player hates the devs cause WHY? Or you can't exchange at all in which case you just start banging your head against the table. Also, if only certain things can even BE bought with certain currencies, well anyone who's played Borderlands 2 long enough knows to hate the very sight of iridium. It might be neat for lore, but as a game mechanic its almost certainly near worthless. As for Gold/Silver/Copper. What's easier to read? "89 gold, 79 silver, 12 copper." or "897,912 gold." The former, even though it's longer, is a bit more understandable. Then again the psychological value of money is a very real thing (ever noticed how you're more reluctant to spend one twenty that to spend 4 fives?). Maybe they can just make it sound more valuable than copper or whatever.

Don't think Baldur's Gate was interesting at all, it was still a "this item is better than this one" just narrower. "I do swords, is this sword better than this one?" Then unless it was some legendary thing it was "Oh, I got a mace, I don't use mace's, sell item!" Neither general nor specific weapon skills actually sounds interesting by themselves. Though as I understand it they're trying to make different weapons useful in different situations. So if you have a character that has a lot of single weapon specializations i.e. Dudehuge has skill in "Two handed swords, one handed maces, spears, and short swords" then it's useful to have all of those potentially, as you could end up with a scenario to use each of those weapons and a weapon of each of those types. Then again more general weapon specializations would allow you to switch more people for the situation. The biggest downfall I can see then is having very specific weapon specializations and making it highly impractical or crippling for SOMEone in your party to have a lot of weapons specializations. I.E. "I have this awesome mace and a huge boss that's weak to maces, too bad I didn't choose maces as a skill for anyone because the game would have borked me for making sure I did!"

No thanks It does give me an idea for an entire game, where you are not the hero but the Deus Ex Machina (the god in the machine) that goes around and makes sure the hero succeeds, conveniently blocking debris about to crush him and sending him on the right path and etc. But it's really just a "Deus Ex Machina" button that you press because some area wasn't designed right, I'd not consider it (at this point) to fit with the lore though.

Maybe tone it down to one feather? I'm a fan of silly hats, don't mistake. If they're in I'm giving everyone in my party their own unique silly hat to wear. But there's such a thing as TOO silly. I think the leftmost pushes it a little over that fuzzy line.

There really isn't any reason this couldn't be on a console, PC elitism aside. You guys don't really gain anything from a console port not being made EVENTUALLY. What you do lose out on is more potential sales, meaning more money for both expansions and any sequel. So stop with the complaining, it's coming to the PC first and foremost already, you can only benefit from a console port being made after the initial release. With Unity's support for the PS4, and the little touchpad in the center, I could see Project Eternity coming to the PS4 easily enough.

Heck no, make it (since many DO like it) and further make it AWESOME. Ni No Kuni's Wizard's Companion is a fantastic way to do this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2njipo2sGEU If the money is there I'd love to see this, a similar and just as smooth interface replete with illustrations and all. I'd like it anyway.

My favorite example of a "vertical slice" comes from the original Half Life. Back when it was in development, they had a lot of ideas and cool stuff, but it wasn't coming together even after multiple levels and sequences were "done", looking more like a weird Quake 2 mod than anything. So they had the level designers take all their coolest stuff, put it into a single level, and then they remade the entire game based off that one level. So far as I know, it's something like that which has evolved into the notion of a "vertical slice". As in, you put all your things together, and can figure not just how each thing works individually but all together as well. Plus you get to say to the entire team "play this, this is what we're after"

I want to know how so I can tell you you're doing it all wrong! Anyway, nice update, eager to see the prototype and/or vertical slice video walk through.

4 million USD wouldn't fill out an art budget for "modern quality" models and textures, so what you're talking about here wasn't even on the table. Besides, part of the pitch to kickstarter was EXACTLY what they are doing now. 3D character models on a 2D background, with a special layer on top of it to show where the party can stand. It's what I bought into when I pledged, it's what a lot of people bought into when they pledged. If you were somehow under the mistaken impression that you were getting a full 3D game, do everyone a favor; ask for your money back, and leave. "Modern Quality" models and textures don't require the money you think they do. Budgets are spent on every level having high quality UNIQUE assets, and re-working those a dozen times over, and debugging, and voice acting, and etc. In point of fact they're already building all these assets and textures you'll be seeing in 3D anyway, they're just then baking them into a background. Which really might be a mistake. Unity 4.0 can look pretty good really quickly, it would probably be faster today to just build a straight up 3d game than what is being planned. With baking everything into a background, they gain performance but have to figure out all these things like animating water and grass, and etc. that's all solved in a 3D game. You also have to bake everything again and again and again to see what it looks like, which takes time. While a 3d game can be modified and played instantaneously. This is a timesaver not to be underestimated.

Love the first, big Godlike concept... the others a bit less. The first looks unique and interesting. The others just seem like the typical "we made a dude, but he's water! Isn't that so neat???" Or glowy, glowy dude, he's been covered in the stuff from glowsticks or something. Anyway, thanks for the update!

Well now you guys are talking about something that probably shouldn't be called a disease, at least not traditionally. Odd semi permanent buff/debuff affects might be interesting, but do you really want it to be a "disease" you contract randomly from some enemy? Shouldn't you get it in a different way?

No, simply because if it's during combat it's just a debuff that can be done any other way you want. If it lasts beyond that it's "ugh, now I gotta go cure this. Fine." When you're playing you probably, hopefully, have goal. A very cool goal, you want to get to that next thing, you want to continue the story. When obstacles come your way, it's fun because you're overcoming to go towards that goal. But when you get something like a "disease" in an RPG, or a "poisoned" in something like Pokemon, it's not an obstacle, it's a new goal. But that goal is "cure this damned thing." You take away that cool goal with story elements and etc. that the entire game is driving towards just for a momentary diversion, back to stuff you've probably already seen, doing mostly the same stuff, to accomplish "getting over a cold". After which you get no reward but not being sick. Which isn't a very fun reward, and getting over a cold isn't very heroic. Leave disease out, and others that give you a goal that's not interesting. I'm sure someone will say "but it could be an epic quest!" in which case, you're talking about an Epic quest. Not something that your party member can catch any number of times randomly from "Rabid Giant Necro Chipmunk" enemies.

Sure why not? Asthene, God of Knowing and Fact. Said to be proclaimed by other gods as the most knowledgeable of all creatures, it is whispered that many both ally with and secretly despise Asthene. Ally with when knowledge of something is needed that can not be obtained in other ways, and despised that such knowledge is only posessed by Asthene, and can only be obtained for a price. Supposedly the god of Libraries, Philosphers, Scholars, and Inventors; most such people deny worshiping Asthene, or perhaps deny that Asthene even exists. The symbol of Asthene is said to have been an ancient symbol simply meaning knowledge, one that others have confused as a dietie's mark over time. There are no priests of Asthene, though there are stories of people swearing they have seen the god, and so Asthene remains in lore. Asthene is said to appear in the shape of a man or woman, or sometims not even human. Old yet in no way infirm, a traveler in a cloak, sometimes with a cane and sometimes with a staff, always asking questions and inspecting and writing. There are even stories of those in need asking questions of Asthene, a common touchstone to these stories being the price asked for the knowledge. "From you I ask no price, for the truth is always free for all to find, and is never diluted in the sharing." Obviously conflicting with the story of charging the gods, however scholars note that "from you" is common phrase in such stories, suggesting that perhaps the god, if such exists, only charges other gods. As to why there is doubt the god exists, there remains inconsistencies in such stories often, suggesting such stories are just folktales. Other scholars argue that an old man in a cloak is quite common, that a god as such could be overlooked quite easily, or an old traveler in a cloak simply be confused for the god themselves. The most famous, and enduring tale of Asthene is that of Asthene's Library. The hero is that of a young male, of varying races but always in need of a cure for sickness striking down someone of great import. The hero journey's far and wide, asking of every race and country the knowledge to cure the sickness, but nothing works. Finally, despondent to the point of suicide himself, the hero stands at a cliff's edge over the sea. An old traveler happens to be walking by and, desperate for one lasts chance, the hero calls out the name of Asthene. The traveler turns and smiles. The hero asks if the traveler is Asthene, and the traveler shakes their head, no. "But I know where Asthene can be found." The hero asks where, desperate to find anything. The traveler asks why the hero needs to find Asthene, and the hero explains his story, endind with "truly it is hopeless, only a god could cure this man for me. Asthene would know what god could do so, and perhaps how to entreat them." The old traveler smiles, or perhaps frowns, either way they question what use a god would be at this point. To which the hero responds "I have searched far and wide, and all the knowledge of the world can not avail a cure, so I ask you to find Asthene, so that they may direct me for whom to worhsip. The traveler says no more, but signals to follow. Ther hero looks down the cliff, contemplating his death, wondering if it would be better than another false lead and more dashed hopes. Somehow he does not fling himself down, but follows the traveler. For days they walk, the traveler never saying a word. Bit by bit the land changes, the hero becomes lost, his maps useless, his direction unsure. Finally they enter a gorge, so deep and narrow that not a spot of sunshine hits the floor unless the sun is directly overhead on the solstice. Inside the gorge is a door, a grand door, of old stone. Above is the sign of Asthene. The traveler smiles, and says in parting simply "all that is truth is available to those who know how to find it, for it is always self evident in the world, and will always come to those diligent enough to seek it." The traveler leaves, and the hero enters. Inside the hero hopes to find something grand, something beyond imagining and comprehension of any mere mortal. He imagine fathomless depths and soaring heights, illumination of some strange and wonderful kind, answers to all he would seek. As he steps into the hall he sees shafts of light coming from far above, illuminating into the distance. As his eyes adjust to the darkness his heart falls, inside is a library, of such vastness that the far end can scarcely be seen, and such height that the roof is lost in the dim light. No god in sight, nor could he imagine one ever even entering such a dusty, decrepit place. "Surely, I will die in here, I will die just as well if I go outside, and so will person of import." Lost and befuddled he rifles through the books and scrolls and parchment, finding to his surprise that it is an older version of a language he knows how to speak. With nothing left to do, and no life left to live he resigns himself of spending his last days rifling through the old tomes. Several days, though in some stories several weeks, later the hero emerges at the front gates (or doors, or whatever it may be) of the person of great import. In his hands is a scroll, with specific instructions as to the cure for the illness. The cure and the sickness are of course well known today, the weeping sickness may be cured the right application of, well everyone knows it. Regardless it is said that this is how the cure was found. Many cite it as proof of Asthene's existence, and that his library is still out there, somewhere, guarded by magical spells. Others, usually of a more scholarly pursuit, note the symbol and word Asthene used to mean knowledge itself, and may have just been a good symbol to put above a library. Certianly it remains tradition to put the symbold above such structures even today.

Dragon Age 2 came up with a neat solution, or one that would have been neat if DA2 hadn't been a BS cash grab by EA. Apparently when not in your party, party members would just go home. They'd have a home, and wander around doing something. The drunkard of the group, and there should be one since for all the drinking party NPC's have done none have ever been a "drunkard" could go hang out at his favorite bar if she's not in your party. Want her back? You go to the bar.

Two things. Health (ok, not "health"). "Knocked out" is a fine mechanic, but penalties for being knocked out make it more of something to be avoided. Injuries, i.e. debuffs only curable by large sums of money (going to a healer or something) or rare items, make combat more tense. You'll want to avoid anyone getting downed, rather than just shrugging it off if it looks like you're going to win anyway. Mana and Stamina. What's the difference again? If a wizard only has "mana" then does that mean he can't use any skills that take "stamina". Why have two? Just use stamina for both and be done with it.

Should armor require a skill to use? I'm not sure, after all armor should already have other negatives, the only type of item you can equip (not cursed) to do so. What if heavy armor made characters slower, and made them use more stamina while wearing it, less able to dodge? Then, on top of all that, you have to have spend skill points to use it better, ugh. This also locks in who can wear what armor effectively, unless every class has access to the same skills equally. Instead, by not requiring any skills, you don't have to worry. Who gets what armor is just based on whats appropriate for that character, with no need to level up a skill, or worry that you might want a different type of armor later because that party member might be better with light armor later, or because that heavy armor has this great enchantment that works really well with them.

So, how are skills assigned in Project Eternity? Besides being "skills". Which brings up classes as well, what defines a "class" in PE? So far as I know, neither has been decided yet, besides "classes need to be flexible." "A wizard should be able to pick up a sword and be a melee fighter" paraphrased. What then defines a class? Well, let's take one, a barbarian. What defines a barbarian? A barbarian charges into the fray, heedless of safety to slaughter his enemies. So if that's what a barbarian is, that means that's what other classes aren't. Meaning, say, a unique set of skills only the barbarian has access to. Something like a temporary damage reduction buff that stacks based on the damage your barbarian is doing. The more damage he does in a short period of time, the less damage he takes in that time. Other skills could follow based on that, a unique skill tree that encourages you to fling the barbarian into the midst of combat, knowing they'll do the best that way. But not locking the barbarian into being ranged or melee, or heavy or light armor or etc. Which brings up the prospect of skill trees, and why not? They work well, and give interesting choices. Each class could have a unique skill tree and access to several others based on what they are, and one skill tree could even be your choice. Rangers might, besides their unique (animal companion?) skill tree, skill trees for bows, nature magic, stealth, and (choice), not any unique tree obviously. A wizard, on the other hand, might get (unique), nature magic, heal/buff magic, elemental magic, (choice). The main point, I think I can make here, is that som way needs to be decided for how you choose skills, and that classes need to be defined in some manner. A unique set of skills for each class, accessible only to them, and potentially very important seems the least that can be done to make classes unique without limiting them.

Easy. When you're claiming to know about something that no one else present does, in order to impact another's decision. Example: "Don't worry. I can create amulets that will protect us from the beast's poison." Now everyone present is reassured and maybe more people come with you to track down some poisonous beast, when they wouldn't have before. Only, until that point, it's not as if the game told you "Oh, hey, btw, just so you know, for some upcoming dialogue, there's no such thing as an enchantment that will protect you from this thing's poison." So, without an indicator, you, the player, will most likely assume that THAT choice means that you actually are making everyone amulets of poison-protection, when really you're just making glowy amulets to make everyone feel better. The game either has to tell you you're lying, or arbitrarily make sure the player is ALWAYS informed about anything they might need to lie about, ahead of time (which seems like a lot more work, if you ask me). Or, the 3rd option: Let you guess, and potentially piss you off for no reason. "Don't worry. I can create amulets that will protect us from the beast's poison. (Lie)" tells the player that his character KNOWS he cannot (or at least isn't really going to) create amulets to protect against the beast's poison, AND that any options without (lie) on them are true as far as your character knows. All with 1 simple indicator. I suppose that makes sense, and I bow to you. Assumed character knowledge, that the PC doesn't have, is always something weird. As long as there's not a dialogue option that's the same thing, but ones the truth and ones a lie, I suppose I can see the above occurring and being rather cool.

I utterly despise the explicit "(lie)" next to dialogue options, why is it there? What possible scenario would it be useful? I remember such a dialogue from KOTOR "Are you prepared to accept the Jedi code?" 2 options were "Yes" "Yes (Lie)" There's no difference in gameplay impact. It could have just been "Yes" and then I decided whether it was a lie. Somehow the other option, to lie explicitly, bothered me. Maybe because it didn't actually feel like lying. It was, ironically perhaps, telling the truth in its own way.

As a sorceress, Qara was a useful companion. But any time you have someone in your team who is not a team player, it feels more like a waste of time rather than roleplaying all the "conflict resolution". It's like watching an episode of "The Apprentice". Personally, I could have done without her attitude. I remember her for all the wrong reasons, to the point where I built my own sorcerer and played the game without her, just so I didn't have to listen to her. Her voice was like a cheese grater against the side of my head. Same with Neeshka. Hey, I loved Neeshka as well! My NWN 2 party was usually her, Qara, me, and swapping someone. At least you remember them, and could avoid them if you liked. That, I suppose, at least shows a solid character. Some NPC you remember, has a definitive personality, and can either take on or avoid as you wish. If you end up with an NPC you HAVE to have, that's bad because who's to say you enjoy them? If you end up with an NPC you don't remember at all, then what was the point of them? As long as there's a wide variety of NPC's to choose from, and they're memorable, then that seems good to me.