Jump to content

Brian and Annie merge into a fearsome beast!


H

Recommended Posts

RPG games for Pcs dont sell....

 

Wake up and smell the coffee Morgoth. How long has it been since you seen a real RPG game release instead of "X Game with RPG elements" or an RPGlite (ala most Jrpgs or excel tables). Troika went under for their extremely buggy release of Arcanum and being lab-rats for Source engine. The amount of sales you need is in direct ratio to amount you spend for the game. A 2 man team with (20? 50?) part time helpers does not need to sell 200.000 units in retail to make some buck. (Hell they will probably get most of their buck from Digital release as you get royally shafted in box and retail department if you are small fish.)

 

They have a decent engine that shows the needed barebones graphical representation for combat and world. The engine is (or should be) just a tool to tell the story (instead of story being a paper thin mask to show off shinny graphics)

IG. We kick ass and not even take names.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

During the development process of WtM:B, Source engine was also "still" in development. This (the final changes in Source creating more work and bugs for the game) caused a lot of wasted work-hours for Troika. They were also a lot of issues with Activision (like not beaing allowed to patch the game untill there were a lot of complaints to Activision / rushed release date etc).

 

Then again you are fundamentally correct in a way. RPG titles are not really fast money makers. Their greatest strenght comes from... well not dieing i guess. It's like Interplay earning cash from FO1 and 2 even today or BG/IWD still being sold.

 

You are also correct in Troika's (and previous companie's) bad financial managements.

IG. We kick ass and not even take names.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that's what I'm trying to say, they have a 5 man team, and they don't want a publisher because they want complete control. The previous game is supposed to finance the next one, so if AoD doesn't do well enough, it's the end of the road.

 

Edit: You'll be able to order a CD with a nice manual from their website, in addition to DD, I don't know about other arrangements.

Edited by Wrath of Dagon

"Moral indignation is a standard strategy for endowing the idiot with dignity." Marshall McLuhan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Morgoth, How many people do you think worked on FO1's cstory and quests and other written bits? Most of the work for FO1 way on making an engine from ground up. We see the size difference when they couldshift most of the creators from coding to creating.

 

They have a decently coded engine, they are creative people with decent past (that is opensource) and they are not restricted by PR or other Policies or diseases of corporation rot. My personal guess is 65 to 35 for an enjoyable and good game at this point.

 

Sure it doesn't look spectacular. So what? I am still playing JA2 and Defense Grid over CnC3+ and other modern crap. When you are not playing an FPS, the graphics falls way down in priority list. Hell I still have Dwarven Fortress here...

IG. We kick ass and not even take names.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to VD, they've gotten quite a few offers from publishers actually (one of which was close to be signed). But then again he must be lying because he is VD amirite.

You have a Venereal Disease that's talking to you..? You need a doctor.

Swedes, go to: Spel2, for the latest game reviews in swedish!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then again you are fundamentally correct in a way. RPG titles are not really fast money makers. Their greatest strenght comes from... well not dieing i guess. It's like Interplay earning cash from FO1 and 2 even today or BG/IWD still being sold.

 

 

That's true. Josh has said, and I am paraphrasing here to the best of my recollection, that while crpgs may not blow the doors off on initial sales, they tend to sell very well over time.

 

 

I mean people are stil buying Fallout today. Ho many people are buying shooters from 1997?

 

Its unfortunate the most publishers are out for the fast buck.

Notice how I can belittle your beliefs without calling you names. It's a useful skill to have particularly where you aren't allowed to call people names. It's a mistake to get too drawn in/worked up. I mean it's not life or death, it's just two guys posting their thoughts on a message board. If it were personal or face to face all the usual restraints would be in place, and we would never have reached this place in the first place. Try to remember that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're a moron. Have you even read by post?
Oh, my. Morgy is confused and can't find something to say, so it's hissy fit time for him.

 

Apparently, it's you who can't read, asswipe. Much less follow an argument through multiple posts without looking like a headless chicken:

 

 

You can't have a good art direction if your engine doesn't support certain features, let alone a decent poly-count.
This is patently false, as evidenced by the example you kindly provided yourself, but which, somehow, you didn't quite stop to think through:
Unless you go 2D painting all the way back a 'la Infinity Engine, you need some geometry detail to get the lighting look right. And proper lighting makes 50% of the art direction.
Games have been achieving lighting effects by means of hand-made scenarios LONG before crap like polycount was even an issue. And, of course, lighting isn't even a factor in some games:

 

final03.gif

 

But I guess that if a game doesn't require Quad SLI, then it either has NO art direction, or it sucks anyway, right? Either that, or it's (yet) another instance of Morgy not knowing what the **** he's talking about.

 

Go back to benchmarking, assclown.

- When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doom did lighting effects with some crazy pixel brightening technique, I believe it was called the "Carmack's Reverse".

 

I don't see why you're bringing up Hearts of Iron, obviously it doesn't need lighting because it's a damn spreadsheet with a map clipped to in. Not that it's a bad thing, but it has no graphics, thus no lighting.

Edited by Purkake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doom did lighting effects with some crazy pixel brightening technique, I believe it was called the "Carmack's Reverse".

 

I don't see why you're bringing up Hearts of Iron, obviously it doesn't need lighting because it's a damn spreadsheet with a map clipped to in. Not that it's a bad thing, but it has no graphics, thus no lighting.

It has 2D sprites you can turn on/ff. And anyway, does that mean the game has bad or no "art direction"? That's why I started my original rebuttal with "as a general statement". Shouldn't be too hard to understand?

 

Okay now. How about...?

 

phoenix_wright_ace_attorney-206684.jpg

 

Or Pokemon? Or any other game that doesn't do 3D? Contrary to this widespread myth, those do exist.

Edited by 213374U

- When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you arguing about anyway? There's nothing wrong with 2D graphics, especially when they are well done, like in Phoenix Wright.

 

Having bad art direction means stuff being generic(using some lame repeating clipart texture for walls) or just plain ugly.

Edited by Purkake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

*sigh*

 

I'm arguing that good art direction and modern technical thingamajigs aren't necessarily linked. I thought it should be clear from my first post in this thread:

 

You can't have a good art direction if your engine doesn't support certain features, let alone a decent poly-count.
As a general statement, this is simply false. Art direction predates polycount.

 

AoD's engine looks plain ugly, though.

I'm not so sure now, though. Did that somehow come out in swahili and I can't see it or what?

- When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree, art direction is about making the game look appealing, having powerful graphics doesn't help if your game looks like ass.(Case in point: Fallout 3, Gears of War)

 

There are beautiful games that require very little graphical power:

 

braid1.jpg

 

The difference is really between having functional graphics(like AoD) that just depict what is going on and having the graphics bring the world to life.

Edited by Purkake
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not so sure now, though. Did that somehow come out in swahili and I can't see it or what?

Not really ;)

 

Seems like we are all non-native english speakers, something might have gotten lost somewhere in translation/re-translationt. At least, that is what I prefer to think. Otherwise, the screeching noises and clawing at eyes are a bit hard to explain :p

 

As far as I've been able to pick up, art direction is about "style", whereas engines might put limits on how you can implement a style.

“He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the game concept is strong enough that it's going to take some major ugliness to mar it, and the AoD engine, though ass ugly, is not ugly enough. I actually think that the game would be best served by being on either end of the graphics bell curve - 2D tiles and text could really work. So could a state-of-the-art engine. I'd rather see the former, really. But AoD's engine looks neither pretty nor neat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To think that the OEI forums is such a nest of graphics whores. Shame on you people, SHAME!

 

Yes, because I say one engine looks poor I'm a graphics whore. :(

 

Seriously, why the hell would you even give a damn about the graphics?

 

Why would I not care about graphics? Are good graphics required, no. Would I prefer a game with at least decent grapics, yes.

 

How have your eyes become oh-so-delicate, that you would complain about a low-budget independent project's graphics? Where you born and raised by supermodels, teaching you to only look at appearances and ignore the inside? Do you stare at the sun and think "oh hell yeah, that's sum awesome HDR lighting right there wohoo!"?

 

No I just prefer quality. Which in the graphics depatment, AoD is not.

cylon_basestar_eye.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're talking 3D art direction here, kiddo. Show me some low-polygons that have an excellent art direction.

startopia_006-large.jpg

Oh Jimmy, you were so funny.

Don't let me down.

From habit he lifts his watch; it shows him its blank face.

Zero hour, Snowman thinks. Time to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...