Brian and Annie merge into a fearsome beast!

[cronicler]

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)

[Morgoth]

Lab rats for source engine. Explain what's that supposed to mean. Because Troika chose this engine. Troika didn't fail because of their buggy games, but because they didn't plan their games and funding very well.

[cronicler]

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.

[Wrath of Dagon]

360 version? You're a laugh riot. Yes, as chronicler said, definition of success is quite different for a 5 man team vs a 50 man team.

[Morgoth]

360 version? You're a laugh riot. Yes, as chronicler said, definition of success is quite different for a 5 man team vs a 50 man team.

A 5 man team doesn't need a publisher. They go DD only.

 

A 50 man team however needs to get fed, so they need a publisher. Publisher not gonna release PC only game (see Risen).

[Wrath of Dagon]

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 August 7, 2009 by Wrath of Dagon

[Morgoth]

Yeah, sounds cool. Except, I don't gonna buy some dip**** game from a 5 man team.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Like I said, you mustn't be part of the target audience.

[cronicler]

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...

[mkreku]

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.

[mkreku]

Yeah, sounds cool. Except, I don't gonna buy some dip**** game from a 5 man team.

Eschalon: Book 1 was made by like.. two people. It's excellent.

[Slowtrain]

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.

[Starwars]

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

 

Not that I'm aware of no.

[213374U]

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:

 

 

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.

[Purkake]

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 August 7, 2009 by Purkake

[213374U]

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...?

 

 

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

Edited August 7, 2009 by 213374U

[Purkake]

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 August 7, 2009 by Purkake

[213374U]

*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?

[Purkake]

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:

 

 

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 August 7, 2009 by Purkake

[213374U]

Lol. What game is that?

[Purkake]

Lol. What game is that?

 

It's Braid.

[Gorth]

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

 

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.

[Pop]

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.

[Bos_hybrid]

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.

[crakkie]

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