[Project Eternity Rezzed screencaps (world map, new areas)]

Just the quickest MS Paint take on how I'd like to see it. Obviously the placement of the portraits/icons/log could be changed around for usablity - this is just to demonstrate the use of space. It takes slightly less space in absolute terms, allows the log to be expanded, and the larger part of the viewport is more open vertically.

 

[Project Eternity Rezzed screencaps (world map, new areas)]

I guess the UI is just a placeholder, but for what it's worth, I don't like this layout at all. It seems to gather up the wost aspects of both the classic and minimalist styles, being both large and obstructive to the widescreen viewport, and rather unpleasant aesthetically in its placement and in closing off only part of the screen. If it was spread across the entirety of the bottom part of the screen, it would take the same amount of space but in a more even and pleasing way, and the larger part of the viewport would have more space vertically, which I'm certain would be more useful than the small bit in the right bottom corner.

[Project Eternity Rezzed screencaps (world map, new areas)]

 

 

 

"Vampiric Torture" sounds quite unpleasant.

[Update #56: Paladins and Wild Orlans]

Stick-in-the-butt Lawful Stupid is underrated.

[Will we ever see an RPG with realistic combat mechanics?]

Speculatively:

 

Um, no? I don't really mean that. I just mean, fighting is unfair. Yes, that means one-hit deaths ARE possible and happen often enough, but even if you don't allow one-hit deaths, generally speaking, fights are still brutish and short. A solid punch will knock anyone dizzy, allowing for following punches to send them to the floor. Jab my fingers in your eyes, now you're blinded, slap your ears, now you're defeaned and imbalanced, a kick to the crotch is so stunning there's little defense to it; even if you're a master of any kind of martial art, training your whole life day in and day out, the most novice opponent has a high chance of defeating you on the battlefield. Because battles are exciting, adrenaline clouds your senses, things happen, simulated combat isn't suited to games about character development, because real-life street fighters, warriors, and commanders of battle, have very short, very stunted lives, save a very select lucky few.

Probably your character would be one of the exceptionally skilled or lucky few rather than the rank and file (as usual - though the latter could be cool as well, the story of an individual soldier heading off to die for the machinations of those in power or for his God). Some fighters prevailed again and again, even against skilled warriors or in the chaos of the battlefield: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miyamoto_Musashi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_H%C3%A4yh%C3%A4 http://www.eldacur.com/~brons/Maupin/LaMaupin.html

 

In order for an RPG to feature modern or medieval combat, we need to give players ways to survive their battles consistently, otherwise the game becomes frustrating and obtuse. If I break both your arms, how do you have any chance of winning a fight? You don't, really. It's why true fighters do as Sun Tzu suggests - they avoid battles and win without relying on direct confrontation.

Yes! Diplomacy and intimidation would be crucial, as well as using tactics and subterfuge to tip the scales in your favour when you did choose to fight. Perhaps you'd even have to know how to back down sometimes. As you note, one possible mechanic would be the hiring of new henchmen, like in JA. Caution and survival through meaningful single encounters would the be central gameplay concerns, rather than wading through armies of enemies IE-style.

 

The combat could function consistently if actual hits were rare; instead of landed blows eating one's hitpoints, the central mechanic would be the defence and offence to land the one blow. Which, come to think of it, might function a lot like hitpoints in practise, but on a different level of abstraction.

 

I'm not proposing any of this for PE, mind, but would love to play an IE-like game with such mechanics.

[Armour & weapon designs - a plea (part III).]

At least it's tasteful boob plate.

[I hope the mechanics are more flexible than BG]

I get the impression they will be, in Eternity.

[Music in the PE universe]

I would love to hear something like the embedded sacral chant in a medieval game, and it would go nicely with the themes proposed for Eternity, as well. The music (or the general spiritual/intellectual climate) of course doesn't have to correspond to that of our Renaissance even if the technology vaguely does, but it can be evocative of a certain atmosphere (as it is in Arcanum).

 

[Relationship/Romance Thread IV]

I just think an Isabela type person can only enhance the game?

Certainly not if she doesn't make sense within the setting and its values, or if she's weaker as a character than the others, being thrown in there for the sake of it.

[Armour & weapon designs - a plea (part III).]

Dürer's "The Knight, Death and the Devil".

 

 

And related bits:

 

 

 

[Armour & weapon designs - a plea (part III).]

Longsword fencing from the Goliath manuscript.

 

 

More:

 

 

 

 

[Armour & weapon designs - a plea (part III).]

The schiavona, my favourite.

 

 

More:

 

 

 

[Relationship/Romance Thread IV]

I don't think the issue is whether it's "realistic" or believable that the characters become romantically attached during the story. It's whether portraying this is central enough to the game to include, especially at the expense of other important aspects of the characters/setting. Games usually don't give deep portrayals of the characters' philosophical or artistic inclinations, or of their faith or health issues, although these are often of the greatest importance to one's life. P:E might include some such themes, but whether romance is important enough for the game, for reasons other than the fact that some people (myself included, admittedly) enjoy playing dating sim in RPGs, is separate from whether it's believable that romance could happen during the story.

 

It's also a separate question whether the game would be improved by including romance - you know, whether Marlow falling in love with the native princess for the sake of having a romance aspect to the story would make Heart of Darkness better...

[Update #54: Art Update - Work IS in Progress!]

centurionofprix: No, nothing of the sort, just the same curiosity I've always felt when people prefer the mechanics of the game before the game. Like you say, a computer RPG is that graphical representation - just add in ambient sound, music, the story, the moving of character objects through areas and in combat. No insults needed. I'm just surprised, given the centrality of the role in roleplaying games, but I am perfectly fine with people playing it that way. None of the sides here should have precedence over the other, that's all, and things should be optional.

 

I didn't mean it was insulting, just loaded with the notion that people aren't actually enjoying the game when they follow the mechanics of the action. One (I think central) meaning of the "role" of the character in a roleplaying game consists in the way the character's abilities/qualities function within the mechanics. The combat log is a sensible extension of this aspect of the game, and games with very little audiovisual representation can still be great roleplaying games because a game isn't merely its audiovisual aspect.

 

You're right, though - different games have different (and valid) emphases between the mechanical and the storytelling aspects.

 

(I'm equally surprised that the log's portrayal of the actions, in the abstract, should break anyone's "immersion", but that's up to personal preference as well. For me, it aids the storytelling because the abstraction, transparently presented as game mechanics, doesn't bleed over into the in-character world of the game.)

[Solving The Rest Problem: Limited resting, or respawning enemies?]

I'm against this, because this is a story driven rpg. The problem is, that not in all situation it's plausible that there are more enemies. If you attack a thieves hideout, why would there more enemies afer one day of resting. Sometimes there could be more enemies, but not in every dungeon.

Resting isn't always quite realistic either, but apparently Obsidian wants to allow it in order to make dungeon crawling less frustrating. If you allow the abstraction of sleeping for a day and pressing on, why not have the thieves respawn as well? They probably would use that time to regroup and set up new defenses. There are some scenarios in which respawning enemies don't make sense at all, and the mechanic wouldn't have to be used in those cases, but it could still work as a general solution.

[Update #54: Art Update - Work IS in Progress!]

 

I spent more time watching the portraits to monitor the health and status effects and the log than the battle itself. I don't know what kind of experience some had, but i don't remember IE combat being a "visceral" experience, nor should it be.

 

 

I usually went for "core" settings, especially when the games were based on D&D. And no, visceral gameplay of the kind I think you mean here is not my cup of a tea. Still, I'm surprised you'd rather watch that combat log than enjoy the game.

 

A bit of a "have you stopped beating your wife yet" vibe to this statement, isn't there? Maybe that is the way some people enjoy the game -following the mechanics of the action rather than the graphical representation of characters standing still and swinging at each other- especially on the higher difficulties.

(Or with mods like SCS to make the game more suitably challenging.)

[Update #54: Art Update - Work IS in Progress!]

Personally I think this UI is great. One can argue about wasted space, but to be honest I don't think that applies to a game like this, where the feel and blend of the art and how it enriches the atmosphere of the scene supersedes the function. DOTA is a fast paced game, and the art is secondary to game play, therefore having a limited UI that doesn't obstruct the screen makes sense for it.

 

I would also argue for keeping the UI as one singular module, rather then splitting it apart. It frames the screen nicely, and keeps what I'm looking at in almost a movie-like appearance, and I think that enhances the experience.

 

Keep up the good work! I'm super excited for this project.

I agree in general, but even games concerned with optimized efficiency for multiplayer, like DotA, LoL and Starcraft 2, still use solid UIs. The implication elsewhere in the thread that P:E is hanging on to an outdated design sensibility while everyone else has moved on just isn't true.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Update #54: Art Update - Work IS in Progress!]

.....

Nice try.

 

As for how can all this be done?  Actually quite easy, sound effects, visual effects, character reactions.  When a guy hits you and your character makes an "oof" sort of sound effect and sort of bends backwards they clearly took a hit.  When your character yells out "ARghhh!" and falls on the ground they clearly took a lot more than "a hit".  Likewise character animations and sound effects can show parries, blocks with shields, your character can call out "My attack is ineffective?!?!" (heh heh), and any number of other cues to let you know what is going on in combat.

 

This is not 1990 anymore.  Graphics have come a very very long way and can show a great range of depth, and good sound design can cover for what graphics can't do.  As for arrows.... not only could your character make a comment like "Hmmmm... out of arrows!" but you also have weapon swap icons, they could just show your arrow count right there.

 

Unless you can make animation and sound display the precise amount of HP/stamina lost, in such a way that past events can also be accessed, and, ideally, also displaying the die rolls/equations that go into the actions, the same things aren't being shown at all. All of this seems Not Bloody Likely. Such design doesn't serve "immersion" either because all one would be doing is to blend the obviously game elements of HP/stamina points into the in-character world of the story itself, as a vague sort of guesswork, rather than keeping the game aspects as clear abstractions.

 

(edit: this is in response to the general idea that information provided by the combat log could be replaced with in-game feedback.)

 

 

As for IE games.  No, I do not want BG3.  I want a modern 2013-2014 RPG made by the people who made BG that uses modern technology and a fresh design to make something that is in the same spirit and style but progressive and new at the same time.

Are you talking about P:E? Are there any BG devs working on Eternity?

[Relationship/Romance Thread IV]

...

[Relationship/Romance Thread IV]

[Update #54: Art Update - Work IS in Progress!]

 

So if it were up to me there would be no out of dialogue dialogue window at all, much less a combat log.  There is just no need.  It was there originally to appeal to the min/maxer D&D players, but Eternity is not D&D though and a combat log strikes me as being about as immersion breaking as it gets, nor is there a DM to fight with when you think the math is wrong.  The funny thing is many die hard old school IE game fans will tell you immersion is super important to them, but be mad if you do something like remove the combat log.

 

Having a combat log benefits "immersion" in the sense that it it presents the numbers in a clearly abstract format, rather than making these obvious game elements bleed over into the in-character gameworld as a kind of guesswork. And, of course, it's useful for playing the actual game if it's adequately challenging.

 

But since the log can apparently be disabled in PE, I guess everyone will be happy.

[Update #55: Vertical Slice Update]

 

No offense intended here, but should they change things in order to satisfy somebody who evidently has played entirely too many games and has become bored with certain common motifs? For every such player who is bored, there are probably two others that are new to the genre and would enjoy it.

 

Absolutely. I love the concept, I just agree with chilloutman on this particular detail, and with his wish that pink/purple not become the universal colour of magic in P:E. It's not that this particular scene has to be changed, but rather that the same motif hopefully won't be used to the point of blandness. The IE aesthetic with separate colours for different kinds of magic was much more entertaining.

[Update #55: Vertical Slice Update]

 

While I like BG feel from concept what I dont like is how 'magic power' starting to be represented by purple/pink color. I hated it on D3 and I hate in in every game which does it. I know magic missile was pink in BG as well but I think in these days everything except elemental magic is 'Arcane pink'. It looks like some source of energy, why its not blue/white electric? yellow/white source of power like heat? black hole? I notice it on mage artwork with snakes - purple. Why?. I dont mind it for some spells but I cant play caster which every second spell is purple (looking at you GW2) I may be alone in this, but I still have to get it out

 

On other note good job Obs, doing fantastic work, hope we will see few seconds from gameplay soon.

 

peace

 

If this were a real world energy generator that is outputting as a black body radiator, I might agree with you. But apparently it's not. Ergo, purple is fine and there's no reason they need to follow real world physics.

 

I think chilloutman meant the aesthetic, and the way pink seems to have become the standard colour of magic in newer games.

 

[Arcane Fencer]

The Witcher?

[NWN2 influences: what to take and what to leave]

There's also a difference between the villain slaying the player, or simply being too powerful to confront, and the villain doing something the player should be able to prevent by playing within the rules of the setting/story.