Why is Obsidian making this?

[Nathaniel Chapman]

Because we have the opportunity to make an ARPG on PC and Console, with a combination of great story, great combat mechanics and great art, with actually enjoyable co-op, in a universe where we can take the opportunity to flesh the lore out pretty much as we like (with positive, constructive feedback from GPG), supported by a great publisher, all while continuing to develop the Onyx engine, which will serve us for some time to come.

 

I haven't actually really enjoyed a co-op ARPG since BG:DA, and before that basically since Secret of Mana. I think people are looking for a really good one (I know I am), and we want to be the ones to make it.

 

Are there any other co-op action RPGs (or even non co-op) that you have liked that stand out in your memory?

 

It depends what you mean by action RPGs. I liked the Diablo games a lot, but to me they felt less like co-op and more like "playing beside other people." Thats less a fault of the game and more the people I ended up playing with, though I also think that it's a little weird lumping point and click RPGs in with games like BG:DA because they play so differently.

 

I guess, because I play a lot of action and fighting games as well as hardcore RPGs, I tend to be a little harsh on games that feel like incomplete action games or incomplete RPGs. You need to have the good parts of both for it to really work.

[LadyCrimson]

It depends what you mean by action RPGs. I liked the Diablo games a lot, but to me they felt less like co-op and more like "playing beside other people." [....]

That right there is exactly my issue with most online 'co-op' multiplayer games. I do like playing with other people, but it's so difficult to find folks (randomly, on the internet) who are a good fit for me.

 

If Dungeon Siege3 = my husband will play with me, it will become one of my favorite games.

Which reminds me...will this have LAN, or will MP be online only?

[Stalin]

Because we have the opportunity to make an ARPG on PC and Console, with a combination of great story, great combat mechanics and great art, with actually enjoyable co-op, in a universe where we can take the opportunity to flesh the lore out pretty much as we like (with positive, constructive feedback from GPG), supported by a great publisher, all while continuing to develop the Onyx engine, which will serve us for some time to come.

 

I haven't actually really enjoyed a co-op ARPG since BG:DA, and before that basically since Secret of Mana. I think people are looking for a really good one (I know I am), and we want to be the ones to make it.

 

What has the Onyx engine been used for, or is this a new thing?

 

I do hope you put out a good game since I can't stand Bethesda or Bioware's offerings, or those Fable games, but you guys reaaaaaaaaallllly don't do combat, combat balance, or QA very well. These are the three things that are central to an ARPG; co-op even more so. You guys must realize this, but the question then becomes how do you remedy it. From what I have read, game development these days is pretty cutthroat, and because of development costs a single failed project can doom an entire company. Picking up a game that doens't play to any of your strengths just seems dangerous, no matter the publisher (congrats though on not selling out to EA or Activision, which are tearing down the quality in Bioware's and Blizzard's titles, respectfully). Then again, Square thrives on polish while Sega is notorious for half-assing it, so I would suspect that you're receiving better QA support.

[Oner]

What has the Onyx engine been used for, or is this a new thing?

It would've been used in the Aliens RPG.

[J.E. Sawyer]

You guys must realize this, but the question then becomes how do you remedy it.

From a high level, it's important that the people who are developing combat mechanics have a thorough understanding not only of the moment-to-moment player experience but also what is required from the engine to support that player experience. Onyx has been in development for about 4+ years and we've (especially Nathaniel and the programmers) put a lot of effort into ensuring that the core combat game play can be well-supported by the engine. But the other side of this is ensuring that individual area designers are using the core game play mechanics well. On DS3, that's Nathaniel's responsibility. On F:NV, it's mine.

[Humodour]

in a universe where we can take the opportunity to flesh the lore out pretty much as we like

 

Thought so. That's good to hear.

[Humodour]

Which reminds me...will this have LAN, or will MP be online only?

 

Almost 100% definitely going to have LAN play (or play by IP, which is equivalent), because otherwise it'd require a system similar to Battle.net

[Purkake]

Which reminds me...will this have LAN, or will MP be online only?

 

Almost 100% definitely going to have LAN play (or play by IP, which is equivalent), because otherwise it'd require a system similar to Battle.net

Hmm, indeed, now where might one acquire a system like that...?

 

 

Most PC games haven't had LAN play for like 6 years now

 

[Humodour]

Which reminds me...will this have LAN, or will MP be online only?

 

Almost 100% definitely going to have LAN play (or play by IP, which is equivalent), because otherwise it'd require a system similar to Battle.net

Hmm, indeed, now where might one acquire a system like that...?

 

 

Most PC games haven't had LAN play for like 6 years now

 

 

If you read the previews it's mentioned in a couple that co-op mode can be played online or offline.

[Purkake]

Yeah, on the consoles

[Humodour]

Yeah, on the consoles

 

This was in reference to all versions.

[Purkake]

You know that for sure?

 

Could we get an official confirmation of offline LAN play?

[WorstUsernameEver]

I remember reading that the preview build was actually played on PC (but with an Xbox360 controller), so yeah, if the dev could enter and exit the game without problems, my guess is that the game has lan.

Ok, there's a bit of wishful thinking there, I have to admit.

[Amentep]

It depends what you mean by action RPGs. I liked the Diablo games a lot, but to me they felt less like co-op and more like "playing beside other people." Thats less a fault of the game and more the people I ended up playing with, though I also think that it's a little weird lumping point and click RPGs in with games like BG:DA because they play so differently.

 

I guess, because I play a lot of action and fighting games as well as hardcore RPGs, I tend to be a little harsh on games that feel like incomplete action games or incomplete RPGs. You need to have the good parts of both for it to really work.

 

Thanks for the answer; I first played Diablo on the PS1 (although I did end up with the original PC version later). Playing it with a controler doesn't really make it that much different from other action based RPGs, in my experience (in fact it reminded me a lot of Arcus Odyssey for the Genesis playing Diablo on a console).

[Wombat]

Alpha Protocol made me wonder what is going on behind the door but, as far as FO:NV and DSIII go, I cannot find possible major problems (Of course, how the market will react is a totally different story, though). Indeed, information is scarce about the latter but, reading couple of previews and interviews, the system seems to have gotten lot of forethought. (Rather, I'm bit puzzled...how could the same company end up with major gameplay "issues" of AP, which don't seem to be unpredictable even few years ago?)

[WorstUsernameEver]

Alpha Protocol made me wonder what is going on behind the door but, as far as FO:NV and DSIII go, I cannot find possible major problems (Of course, how the market will react is a totally different story, though). Indeed, information is scarce about the latter but, reading couple of previews and interviews, the system seems to have gotten lot of forethought. (Rather, I'm bit puzzled...how could the same company end up with major gameplay "issues" of AP, which don't seem to be unpredictable even few years ago?)

 

Someone else was in the lead system position on Alpha Protocol, though I don't remember who it was.

Also, AP had probably a lot of planning problems in its dev cycle.. I don't really understand why the devs focused on adding useless features like guards being knocked when you smash a door open, but not some features the game begged for, like some more tactical stealth (moving bodies etc.) etc.

It seems pretty clear to me that Obsidian put a lot of thought in the dialogue/story/reactivity mechanics but not nearly as much when it comes to the gameplay for that game.

It looks like they're learning with their new project.. let's hope it's true, and they don't end up with the same problems in gameplay.

[Wombat]

Also, AP had probably a lot of planning problems in its dev cycle.. I don't really understand why the devs focused on adding useless features like guards being knocked when you smash a door open, but not some features the game begged for, like some more tactical stealth (moving bodies etc.) etc.

It seems pretty clear to me that Obsidian put a lot of thought in the dialogue/story/reactivity mechanics but not nearly as much when it comes to the gameplay for that game.

Actually, long time ago, I posted possible combination of their story-telling and stealth action game-play in atmospheric settings since they didn't develop a game with such game-play. So, I'm pretty disappointed by the reviews of AP...the designers seem to have thought that they could be successful in polishing the gameplay of something similar to Vampire the Masquerade:Bloodlines, which was exactly what I feared when I was writing them. I'll probably get AP in some time for role-playing factors but my money is almost nothing in financially supporting Obsidian.

[Sannom]

(Rather, I'm bit puzzled...how could the same company end up with major gameplay "issues" of AP, which don't seem to be unpredictable even few years ago?)

 

Change of direction midway in the project (I think the original vision had a lot less of action and stealth gameplay), change of tone (from Syriana to Bond/Bauer/Bourne), three iterations of the story to get it right, a really powerful but probably too "generic" engine (Obsidian has a history of working on top of engines already designed for RPGs), a Lead Designer that is much less focused on action-y mechanics that Josh or Nathaniel, etc. Really, there is a lot of things that could explain a relatively unpolished gameplay.

 

 

Someone else was in the lead system position on Alpha Protocol, though I don't remember who it was.

 

Wasn't Matt "Awesome Beard" McLean the Lead Systems Designer on Alpha Protocol?

Edited June 19, 2010 by Sannom

[J.E. Sawyer]

I don't really understand why the devs focused on adding useless features like guards being knocked when you smash a door open, but not some features the game begged for, like some more tactical stealth (moving bodies etc.)

These two things are not similar in terms of resources and tuning required. The former is as simple as applying an (already extant) facing-based knockdown animation on someone caught in the path of a door being kicked open. The latter, at a minimum, requires synchronized animations between Mike and ragdoll knocked out characters; idle and directional movement cycles for Mike and the character being moved; and subsequent transitions out of those states back into ragdoll.

 

Stealth, done well, is a system that requires a large number of features and a huge amount of tuning. Frankly, knocking a dude down is simple as hell.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

I still think AP would have done much better if it had been more focused on a single type of gameplay. Letting people choose different combat styles just means more balancing and work. If the game had been entirely focused on stealth, it might have done better.

[Wombat]

I still think AP would have done much better if it had been more focused on a single type of gameplay. Letting people choose different combat styles just means more balancing and work. If the game had been entirely focused on stealth, it might have done better.

The basic game-play choices must be just assault and stealth. Once building stealth game-play, giving more ammo and damage capability (increasing damage to opponents while decreasing damage to the protagonist) would be enough for assault option. So, I believe, what Sawyer tried to tell is that they didn't have enough resources to make core stealth game-play, probably, even that of a few years ago.

 

Then, it was a matter of resources. Naturally, the next question is why Obsidian/Sega failed to see this coming...but I don't believe that you failed to see, though. In any case, if issues are recognized and you are working on more promising projects, I think it would suffice for us. It bugs me that AP wasn't able to release CRPGs from fantasy/Sci-Fi genres, though.

[unskilled-]

You guys must realize this, but the question then becomes how do you remedy it.

From a high level, it's important that the people who are developing combat mechanics have a thorough understanding not only of the moment-to-moment player experience but also what is required from the engine to support that player experience. Onyx has been in development for about 4+ years and we've (especially Nathaniel and the programmers) put a lot of effort into ensuring that the core combat game play can be well-supported by the engine. But the other side of this is ensuring that individual area designers are using the core game play mechanics well. On DS3, that's Nathaniel's responsibility. On F:NV, it's mine.

 

So is the Onyx engine going to improve on what everybody has been doing for the past 10 years? One-click combat is getting old I must say.

 

Or it is going to totally dedefine what an ARPG (or CRPG) is, with a completely unique combat system?

[Wombat]

So is the Onyx engine going to improve on what everybody has been doing for the past 10 years? One-click combat is getting old I must say.

 

Or it is going to totally dedefine what an ARPG (or CRPG) is, with a completely unique combat system?

If you are interested in the game, please do your homework and read some articles and comments by designers before posting. For starters, this thread is quite frequently updated by funcroc. Also, make friends with the forum search tool for designers' comments. You can get info of those who are working on the project from this thread.

We've focused a lot on making control of your character more direct than it is in a game like Dragon Age (or NWN2 for that matter!). This goes along with bringing the game to the consoles, where players expect crisper, more responsive controls - lag between hitting a button and your character animating is just not cool for a console ARPG. Along with all of that we're making sure we don't take the player's control away while their character does some kind of finishing blow.

 

So, I'd say we probably aren't going to have longer sequences where your character finishes off enemies - instead, we'll just focus on making our enemies death animations as awesome and epic as possible, and use ragdoll where appropriate so you can get some awesome finishes from physics.

 

Actually, we had a little mini-game going at e3 among the presenters where we tried to use a special dashing sword attack to lob one of the enemies from one cliff to another. That kind of stuff is always fun with ragdoll deaths.

 

[Off topic ]An entry from "ask Uncle Sawyer" site. IMO, the site sheds some light on the dark corners of his mind.

Do you feel that it's forgivable for a RPG to be worse at a gameplay element than another game more dedicated to it because it's a RPG and does other things? The question partially applies to other genres as well such as FPS's with poor vehicle combat.

It can be marginally worse, certainly. It just shouldn't feel bad. It can also be "worse" in breadth but just as good in depth, which I think is also perfectly reasonable.

 

Let's say a game wanted to have most of the stealth elements of Thief. It has the AI, the light, the sound (including audio occlusion), but it doesn't have extinguishable lights, water arrows, rope arrows, moss arrows, or any of that jazz. If the AI, light, sound, etc. are well executed, the goodies that are missing really aren't that big of a deal -- in my opinion, anyway.

Considering his backgrounds (his interest in history and stealth games in general such as Assassin's Creed), he may be interested in working on a CRPG with stealth game-play in a historical setting...[/Off Topic]

[GreasyDogMeat]

I haven't actually really enjoyed a co-op ARPG since BG:DA, and before that basically since Secret of Mana. I think people are looking for a really good one (I know I am), and we want to be the ones to make it.

I recently picked up an original XBox for a great price (I had purchased a few original xbox games to play on my 360 but found the emulation to be... lacking) and I picked up some of the top down ARPGs for it. D&D Heroes, Dark Alliance 1 & 2, Fallout BoS & Hunter: The Reckoning. I have to say I've enjoyed playing them and these types of games are sorely missing on recent systems.

 

Still not to excited about the Dungeon Siege setting though. Its one of the more fantasy RPG settings I've seen.

[Amentep]

IMO D&D Heroes was okay, I actually only thought Dark Alliance 1 was okay and didn't like 2, Fallout BoS wasn't fun IMO but I loved the Hunter games.

 

Also really enjoyed the Champions games on PS2.

 

For my brother - who does play Action RPGs from time to time with me as I've mentioned in other threads the Champions games and the Hunter games were the only ones he got interested enough in to play to completion.