Purely isometric, or mix of isometric, third-person and cinematic?

[ogrezilla]

Dragon Age 2 is cinematic, that should stop this conversation righhttt herrreee.

so is heavy rain

 

Heavy Rain doesn't pretend to be a genre it's not

fair enough. Cinematic style is good for telling a story about preexisting characters; not so good for letting you roleplay your own character.

Edited October 7, 2012 by ogrezilla

[ogrezilla]

No zooming. Not ever. No close-ups, no cinematics, no rotating camera, nothing. Static isometric camera.

 

end of rine.

 

What the gosh darn heck ( keeping within forum rules here) would close-ups and zooming hurt? Or a rotating camera? Would that destroy the tactical combat? If so, please explain.

nothing at all. the rotating likely won't work with the 2d prerendered backgrounds, but there is nothing wrong with rotating cameras in general.

 

Yes it is. To this day I can't touch NWN2 because of camera controls from hell. So no thanks.

that's a problem with a bad rotating camera.

[NOK222]

I'm sure the good devs know what they're doing

[wormix]

This thread was dead for over 2 weeks until someone replied to it. Let it rest in peace.

[LordCrash]

Purely isometric, from A to Z or Alpha to Omega, period!

[zombo]

Sorry if this has been asked before, but one of the main things I'm curious about is the visual functionality and presentation of the game. I'm very curious as to whether this is going to be a purely isometric, top-down affair like BG, Icewind Dale, PlanetScape: Torment, Fallout, etc. or whether it's going to have a more dynamic camera that allows you to play isometric, but also zoom in closer, such as Dragon Age: Origins PC, NWN2, The Witcher, etc.?

 

Personally, I'm hoping for the latter. While I mostly play with the camera pulled out during combat in the likes of DAO and NWN2, it's nice to pull it in for more personal matters and nice to have the more cinematic angles during conversations. I think DAO and NWN2 got the perfect mix of classic RPG and the more cinematic nature of modern games, and I hope this is what Project Eternity employs. I feel my character becomes more personal when I can get a good look at them up close and see them interacting more directly.

 

I'm curious as to what other people feel about this? Has there been any direct indication as to what Obsidian are going for here?

Sorry if this has been asked before, but one of the main things I'm curious about is the visual functionality and presentation of the game. I'm very curious as to whether this is going to be a purely isometric, top-down affair like BG, Icewind Dale, PlanetScape: Torment, Fallout, etc. or whether it's going to have a more dynamic camera that allows you to play isometric, but also zoom in closer, such as Dragon Age: Origins PC, NWN2, The Witcher, etc.?

 

Personally, I'm hoping for the latter. While I mostly play with the camera pulled out during combat in the likes of DAO and NWN2, it's nice to pull it in for more personal matters and nice to have the more cinematic angles during conversations. I think DAO and NWN2 got the perfect mix of classic RPG and the more cinematic nature of modern games, and I hope this is what Project Eternity employs. I feel my character becomes more personal when I can get a good look at them up close and see them interacting more directly.

 

I'm curious as to what other people feel about this? Has there been any direct indication as to what Obsidian are going for here?

I'd like to see this too, but I would not be upset or disappointed were it to be purely isometric.

Edited October 7, 2012 by zombo

[Bobby Null]

Bad rotating cameras are usually a problem with time/money. You can only get the code for camera collision to take you so far. It is then a level design/asset design issue and tends to lead to a lot of bugs that need to be fixed (fixing bugs takes time/money). Even then, rotating cameras in these kinds of games are never perfect.

 

On Project Eternity, we want you guys fighting awesome monsters, not the camera.

 

While not an official statement, zoom will probably be possible. The in-game stuff the artists are currently working on looks very nice, even in these early stages. The 2D art can get a nice paintover to add so many great touches. That's why the old IE games felt like you were playing a piece of art. With the higher resolutions we are working on for PE, expect some sweet looking maps.

[Zeckul]

With the higher resolutions we are working on for PE, expect some sweet looking maps.

Thanks for the input! Just how high resolution are you playing with? I would hope no upscaling is necessary on today's highest resolution displays, i.e. 2560x1600.

[sesobebo]

On Project Eternity, we want you guys fighting awesome monsters, not the camera.

 

</thread>

[DocDoomII]

Not to mention that if the maps are prerendered 2D, the rotating thing would mean that the same area needs to be rendered 4 times.

This if the camera rotates just by 90°.

[Stiler]

While I can understand the 2d backrounds and lack of rotation because of such (having to do multiple ones), I do not get why people can be so dead set against ZOOMING?

 

In the faq it says a zoomable camera is probable, and I hope so.

 

I fail to see how any kind of a zoom function is the "Death" of the rpg? Some of you people seem extremely against any kind of modern evolution, we no longer use 800x600 resolutions. Not to mention have any of you played classic IE games? Playing them on a modern computer with a much higher resolution there are limitations. Yes there are widescreen mods but it doesn't really work that well. I don't get how having a zoom function and better res support in terms of art, etc would be "bad" or hurt the game in ANY way.

 

As far as "zooming = a doll simulator" some of you seemt o be REALLY against any kind of customization. To many people that is the DEFINIING point of an rpg, being able to customize your character, both stat wise and visually (not always, but usually).

 

When it comes to an rpg the definition that is usually found in almost any rpg, even those of different sub-genres of rpg, from action rpg, to sandbox rpg, to linear rpg, party based or solo, is the ability to take a character and "define" them through stats/skills, etc.

 

To want to demean and make those people who like to "visually" customize their characters as thought hey have some kind of "dress up doll" fetish is childish and simply immature, you lack any kind of real argument and only serve to make yourself look like any elitist "my opinion is greater then yours" fanboy.

Edited October 7, 2012 by Stiler

[ogrezilla]

While I can understand the 2d backrounds and lack of rotation because of such (having to do multiple ones), I do not get why people can be so dead set against ZOOMING?

 

In the faq it says a zoomable camera is probable, and I hope so.

 

I fail to see how any kind of a zoom function is the "Death" of the rpg? Some of you people seem extremely against any kind of modern evolution, we no longer use 800x600 resolutions. Not to mention have any of you played classic IE games? Playing them on a modern computer with a much higher resolution there are limitations. Yes there are widescreen mods but it doesn't really work that well. I don't get how having a zoom function and better res support in terms of art, etc would be "bad" or hurt the game in ANY way.

 

As far as "zooming = a doll simulator" some of you seemt o be REALLY against any kind of customization. To many people that is the DEFINIING point of an rpg, being able to customize your character, both stat wise and visually (not always, but usually).

 

When it comes to an rpg the definition that is usually found in almost any rpg, even those of different sub-genres of rpg, from action rpg, to sandbox rpg, to linear rpg, party based or solo, is the ability to take a character and "define" them through stats/skills, etc.

 

To want to demean and make those people who like to "visually" customize their characters as thought hey have some kind of "dress up doll" fetish is childish and simply immature, you lack any kind of real argument and only serve to make yourself look like any elitist "my opinion is greater then yours" fanboy.

psh go play with your doll simulator bioware boy. i hope everyone is a stick figure, no reason to waste time with what my characters look like.</sarcasm>

Edited October 7, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Romiras]

Fixed isometric view sounds so very right.

[Uomoz]

Pure isometric with possibility of zoom in maintaining the camera position (maybe?) like in BGEE.

Edited October 7, 2012 by Uomoz

[villain of the story]

I would like rotating (or switching between) 4 renders of a 2D scene. Commandos 2 and 3 did it and it was way cool and useful.

[Bhaal]

Exactly Commandos did it well but personally i prefer rotating camera. That could be very useful in tactical fights. Even more when the positionning take a important place with some spells and small areas of battle.

[Nidrolok]

I would like rotating (or switching between) 4 renders of a 2D scene. Commandos 2 and 3 did it and it was way cool and useful.

This would be very nice indeed, but since it takes time and money that are better spent elsewhere to do this I'd be happy with an fixed isometric view without rotation.

[max8472]

Purely isometric for me (but please, a good amount of transparency when beyond obstacles!). The question is... how far the camera will be? Like Baldur's Gate or Torment? From the first screenshot it seems that they choose Baldur's Gate "distance".

 

About cinematics... I really like "graphic novel" style for cinematics (like The Witcher 2). Of course, only few of them and only for really important, plot related events. This style is far more cheap than fully rendered 3D cinematics. And you can also avoid voice acting if you so will!

[Hassat Hunter]

What was wrong with the Irenicus-cutscenes in BG2? I liked them... and see no issues with how they can just implement them here...

[Justinian]

 

About cinematics... I really like "graphic novel" style for cinematics (like The Witcher 2). Of course, only few of them and only for really important, plot related events. This style is far more cheap than fully rendered 3D cinematics. And you can also avoid voice acting if you so will!

 

Definitely hand-drawn graphic novel style cinematics - cheaper, more stylish, and gives some opportunity for the player to fill in the blanks with their imagination.

 

Even Blizzard took this approach for the minor "story" beats for Diablo 3 (though in this case there was no story). Baldur's Gate Enchanced will also remake all the cutscenes in a hand-drawn graphical style which is a good choice IMO. Those rendered cutscenes look downright hideous by today's standards.