Attack Animation

[Galorian]

I think that, if it is at all possible, the attack roll should affect the animation- a fighter who rolls 16 and hits shouldn't have the same animation as a the same fighter rolling 8 and still hitting. it could even be used to reflect the prowess of the attacker- a combined modifier and roll of 29 should have an animation far cooler than that of a combined 16 even if they both hit, it simply reflects the fact that the first is a far more skillfully made hit, and is also a good way to make the player feel his charecter is getting better as it levels, not to mention being outright awsome.

 

P.S.: the Illithid model is a true masterpiece of 3D art, and who ever made it should get a medal.

[Nick_i_am]

To my own opinion, good animations are way more important than good graphics.

[Magena]

Sometimes the problem is that if you want there to be different animation for each of those types of hits, that it makes even more models necessary, and that takes even more time to create. Yet most of us also want games to play in a timely manner because we blow threw the games faster than they are making it onto the market.

 

For the number of people who want to have more animations there are even more people who are more interested in the story line.

[Nurvus]

Perhaps new animations could come with patches in the future.

A fighter with Weapon Focus () should have some enhancement to the fighting animations, like a few new animations. And also a weapon master.

Like it was said, perhaps base attack would have an impact on that, but i think class(es) and race should have the greatest impact.

A dwarf shouldn't fight like an elf, given the same weapon style.

Alot of customization is beautiful.

 

It would be great for players to be able to choose full animation styles at character creation, based on race, feats, class, etc... like the way you handle or

carry your weapon. The way you walk. Perhaps limp. Perhaps a left-handed fighter. All those things greatly enhance the fun to play as they give a whole new depth to your characters. :ph34r:

 

All those things however, I believe can be included later on.

For now, however, I say that the permanent stuff be given full attention like the engine, the interface, story, etc.

 

My 5 cents.

Let's hope you guys (Obsidian) make room for later changes like those.

Edited January 28, 2006 by Nurvus

[Weiser_Cain]

If you ask me the anwser is dynamic animations.

[Atreides]

I think that, if it is at all possible, the attack roll should affect the animation- a fighter who rolls 16 and hits shouldn't have the same animation as a the same fighter rolling 8 and still hitting. it could even be used to reflect the prowess of the attacker- a combined modifier and roll of 29 should have an animation far cooler than that of a combined 16 even if they both hit, it simply reflects the fact that the first is a far more skillfully made hit, and is also a good way to make the player feel his charecter is getting better as it levels, not to mention being outright awsome.

 

P.S.: the Illithid model is a true masterpiece of 3D art, and who ever made it should get a medal.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sounds good. An experienced fighter would get better and better animation because (s)he naturally rolls higher because of the higher BAB which makes sense.

[Nathaniel Chapman]

I hate to be a downer, but I think the only way RPGs are going to have significantly better combat animations is if the number of base weapon types available are greatly reduced. That's one reason KOTOR had far superior animations to, say, Neverwinter Nights - there's basically five, maybe six weapons animation sets (One-handed Blade, Double-ended Weapon, Dual-Wielded Blades, Single-handed Blaster, Two-Handed Blaster and Double-Wielded Blasters). NWN had to support Axes, Clubs, Whips, Exotic weapons and all other kinds of craziness.

 

And, when it comes to animator time, you can either spend time making a lot of different animations for a few base weapon types, or relatively few animations for a lot of different weapons. Personally, I think the balance will be shifting towards fewer weapons, as the large variety of weapons in a D&D game isn't necissarily that exciting - five different ways to deal 1d6 aren't always necessary, and DR doesn't factor into the equation often enough or in interesting enough ways to make including every single weapon type from the PHB worthwhile.

 

On the other hand, something like Fallout is great because you can have a ton of different weapons that use similar animations.

[Atreides]

On the other hand, something like Fallout is great because you can have a ton of different weapons that use similar animations.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why's that?

[Gorgon]

I hate to be a downer, but I think the only way RPGs are going to have significantly better combat animations is if the number of base weapon types available are greatly reduced.  That's one reason KOTOR had far superior animations to, say, Neverwinter Nights - there's basically five, maybe six weapons animation sets (One-handed Blade, Double-ended Weapon, Dual-Wielded Blades, Single-handed Blaster, Two-Handed Blaster and Double-Wielded Blasters).  NWN had to support Axes, Clubs, Whips, Exotic weapons and all other kinds of craziness.

 

And, when it comes to animator time, you can either spend time making a lot of different animations for a few base weapon types, or relatively few animations for a lot of different weapons.  Personally, I think the balance will be shifting towards fewer weapons, as the large variety of weapons in a D&D game isn't necissarily that exciting - five different ways to deal 1d6 aren't always necessary, and DR doesn't factor into the equation often enough or in interesting enough ways to make including every single weapon type from the PHB worthwhile.

 

On the other hand, something like Fallout is great because you can have a ton of different weapons that use similar animations.

Can't you re-use animations for weapons of roughly the same dimentions, or would that result in clipping hell ?

[Weiser_Cain]

Get a bigger team for animations. KOTOR is a pretty big property and doesn't seem to have that many animation sets. Cough up the cash to put in the time. Find more efficient ways to get the animations (mocap?). How many people worked on animations anyway?

As for dnd there's the problem of cutting the weapons if you look at it there's no reason to have so many weapons in the game except it a role playing game. More choices lead to more replay value I played the game as a whip specialist for cthulhu's sake, that's beyond sub optimal. Still there's something to be said for the fact I still have NWN installed.

Edited January 30, 2006 by Weiser_Cain

[Tigranes]

Why's that?

 

Guns?

Edited January 30, 2006 by Tigranes

[Diamond]

Get a bigger team for animations. KOTOR is a pretty big property and doesn't seem to have that many animation sets. Cough up the cash to put in the time.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You can't just "get a bigger team" or "cough up the cash" so simply, because of the constrainted budget and time set by the publisher.

[Kaftan Barlast]

On the other hand, something like Fallout is great because you can have a ton of different weapons that use similar animations.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why's that?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Part because the animation is quite simple and part because the animations are the exact same for different weapon. Like how firing a shotgun is the exact same graphic as firing a sniper rifle.

 

 

That was ok to do back then. Nowadays, people would go "WTF?!" if you had a +2 Longsword look just like a +3 Longsword.

[Nurvus]

In answer to Nathaniel Chapman's post:

 

I think that given limited resources and time, alot of weapon types are far more important than alot of animations. Completely.

 

There are loads of reasons, including the deities' favoured weapons from DnD that would make lots of characters likely to choose certain weapons, that very often and unfortunately didn't make it to the game.

Weapons such as Scourges and Spiked Gauntlets. One-handed spears and even throwing spears like Javelins and such.

 

However, even more important that creating alot of starting weapon types or animations, it would be awesome if you developers created some cool support in the game's engine for later additions of animations and weapon types, spells, etc... all kinds of stuff, so that you can, later on, with patches, expansions and community contributions, make the game's quality skyrocket.

 

In the end, I must say that setting a good path towards the ultimate goal is more important that a good start.

 

Again, it's wonderful to be able to be unique in many ways, like limping, being a left handed fighter (I think this one is easy), having only one arm, leg (pirates) and other animations like the way you stand, walk, etc. Support for changes to that, based on race, class, etc, would contribute for a much richer environment, in all terms, specially roleplay.

[Weiser_Cain]

Get a bigger team for animations. KOTOR is a pretty big property and doesn't seem to have that many animation sets. Cough up the cash to put in the time.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You can't just "get a bigger team" or "cough up the cash" so simply, because of the constrainted budget and time set by the publisher.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sure they can they just have to push for it

[Diamond]

Sure they can they just have to push for it

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How are they supposed "to push for it"? Saying this is ignoring reality.

[Wombaticus]

I think this is a great concept, however I'm not sure if it could be exacuted as of yet. In order for anyone to hit the 'ok' button on these kind of ideas you'll have to showcase it early on, and even include it as part of the pitch where that's necessary. Not to mention make time for it in development. That's what a lot of companies wil ask about these days; is this idea a viable asset?

 

So now what? Well, if you want 'evolving combat animation' start that modding! Prove it's popular and it may just catch on

 

Peace,

Joe

[Weiser_Cain]

Sure they can they just have to push for it

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How are they supposed "to push for it"? Saying this is ignoring reality.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'd imagine they'd go about it the same way they went and got as much time to develop NWN 2, ask for it. Maybe you can aid me in my ignorance as to why reality would prevent such a simple thing. Maybe I'm not aware of something you can enlighten me of.

[Diamond]

I'd imagine they'd go about it the same way they went and got as much time to develop NWN 2, ask for it. Maybe you can aid me in my ignorance as to why reality would prevent such a simple thing. Maybe I'm not aware of something you can enlighten me of.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Time and money they've got for development of NWN2 is the result of their contract with the publisher. They are already using all resources allocated to the project and company development, as well as keeping in mind future financial needs. It is not reasonable to expect that a business will throw money at one game feature, just because it will make a bunch of people a bit happier for a week. As well as it is not reasonable to expect employees to work overtime for no extra pay for the same reason.

[Weiser_Cain]

[Diamond]

Funny I hear EA does this all the time.

Animation is a part of the package. I think it

[Nurvus]

As I said, given the limited time and resources, alot cannot be accomplished.

But a few are most important, such as preparing the game for future additions.

 

NWN was and still is a great game, imho.

However, a few flaws was the limited ways in wich one can contribute, as many things are hardcoded, etc.

 

More important than 10 attack animations per weapon type/group is having all possible weapons, even if it means more groups and less animations (like 2 or 3) when the game comes out, as long as later on people can add animations, weapons, spells, feats, skills.

So really the same animation team can choose to have 2 or 3 unique animations for each weapon type, or arrange all sword-like weapons in a sword group with sword animations.

 

It's the greatest card NWN has had so far, customizability. And it can be improved alot still.

 

So I vote for a solid and rich first game, even if incomplete, then adding content with patches, as the game sells and earns the team some of their well deserved reward.

 

Even if they do that for now, I hope they leave the doors open to change and improve it later, like making Scimitars having a really slashing animation =D and Kamas having some great looks.

Imagine your monk or rogue running like those ninjas (arms thrown back, perhaps with a inversed dagger in each, body leaning forward to compensate the speed and keep their trackcion.)

 

For the first release it may be unimportant, but later on I'm sure more and more people will like to make their characters' more and more unique.

Edited February 8, 2006 by Nurvus

[triCritical]

Personally, I think a game should concentrate on the core product its trying to deliver. For instance, in Civ4 when a tank obliterates a rifleman in a flawless victory, how lame would that be? Afterall what the game is attempting to deliver is a strategic experience in which animations are just an eye candy bonus. If resources are pulled away from AI, adding more units, or creating more strategy like features to add less generic animations that would just suck.

 

Likewise games like KotOR II and republic commandos are much different games. And I am betting that KotOR II still had less generic then commando's. Nevertheless, Commando's probably isn't much more then action FP tripe. In which case, having weak animations would probably show poor quality. RPG's have to do so much more, that IMO its just not feasable, nor should to much time ever be devoted to peripheal eye candy.

 

Personally the best combat I have ever seen in a Bioware engine has been in the IE games. Since then I think the combat looks better, but at the same time becomes more mundane. I would actually prefer the animator's resources being devoted to things like AI, which isn't really needed in games like KotOR2, and more interesting combat mechanics, that aren't necessarily twitch.

[Nurvus]

I wouldn't want them to cut in anything related to playability, like AI.

 

I actually said, in my later posts, that given limited resources, I'd go for giving a better base, better support to the game for later additions, than a big start.

In animations, I rather have few at start, but ways to add alot later on, with patches, expansions, etc.

 

This because, NWN, for example, had alot of core things that were nigh or completely impossible to change.

The less imutable things, the better. Even better if there is support for changes.

 

The things that matter are playability. True. I wouldn't want that any different than in first priorities.

 

Yet would be awesome to have some support in toolsets, to create feats, animations, skills, spells, in a way that is easy to add to the game, and enrich the experience.

Edited February 24, 2006 by Nurvus

[Darth Blivion]

I know this isn't a popular choice and might be a little off-topic, but why deal in D&D when there's real-time? There is a strategic element to D&D that a lot of people admire, but that depends on where you want to impliment strategy in combat. In real time the strategy lies in the actual choice of weapons and the actual approach you take to eliminating an opponent. Also, attribute, feat and skill allocations remain unchanged in a real time system.

 

I simply get tired of seeing - mostly in RPG's - where the opponents stand right in front of you (without using the environment for cover) even though they are (for instance) using ranged weapons against, your melee weapons in close quaters.

 

I find that D&D sort off eliminates the need for good combat AI in both party and enemy npc's, such that even with better animations, the scenario is still the same.