Update #34: FIRST ART UPDATE

[JoseJalapenoOnAStick]

As a fun reference they should make a special weapon called the stick of truth

[Rob Nesler]

Hey thanks for the update even if it is completely and totally unimpresive. I like to see where your are direction is going for the world and creatures.

Cool to see the very basics but really there is no need.

It's like me posting a mix with out any of the FX on it.

Well of course. It's polite and useful commentary like this that I find particularly inspiring. I'll get right on this, just for you.

[Hormalakh]

Ignore the trolls Rob... We still love you.

[Michael_Galt]

Or, we could use the "Giant Flail of Troll Bashing +5" to mete out justice on them...

[SophosTheWise]

Can you make this game more childlike like baldur's gate where lines like "Do you wanna tell me a story about trollups and plug tails are popular? Please" , "go for the eyes boo, go for the eyes" are popular and not like witcher 2 stuffs like "saying something or did you just fart" or "piss off witcha" are popular

 

Why not both depending on the situation? I think The Witcher 2 did an awesome job at being really rude and still having fun characters like Dandelion. I just loved the authenticity of TW2, it was really like townsfolk talking. I just can't stand the cliché "Greetings, o noble adventurer!" anymore.

[Hormalakh]

^I thought LordShifu was trolling...

[Valen_Threll]

So from the mention of cloth physics and the model on display, can we infer that visible cloaks as an equipable item are in? I'm not sure if this has been confirmed elsewhere, but it is something i have been hoping for. My ranger character just wouldn't be the same without a cloak. . . (ideally a hooded one ), and this is something that all too often is absent from rpg's. . .

[xSigma]

So from the mention of cloth physics and the model on display, can we infer that visible cloaks as an equipable item are in? I'm not sure if this has been confirmed elsewhere, but it is something i have been hoping for. My ranger character just wouldn't be the same without a cloak. . . (ideally a hooded one ), and this is something that all too often is absent from rpg's. . .

Exactly, I can't wait until my rogue gets a hooded cloak and walks around with the cloth moving and wrinkling with every step.

[Gyor]

Love the art.

 

My first impression of the Amaua was that it was two different species until I looked closer (I'm on a mobile phone). The barbarian looked like a Half Orc at first and the Wizard a Thundercat oddly, but looking closer there appears to be a less pebbly Goliath feel, but we don't know the coloration range yet. I'm hoping for Blue/Aqua with black spots/strips given thier prefered habitat.

 

I will say thier less animalistic then people were expecting. Very interesting.

[rjshae]

So from the mention of cloth physics and the model on display, can we infer that visible cloaks as an equipable item are in? I'm not sure if this has been confirmed elsewhere, but it is something i have been hoping for. My ranger character just wouldn't be the same without a cloak. . . (ideally a hooded one ), and this is something that all too often is absent from rpg's. . .

I can't imagine why they wouldn't. But will they have backpacks?

Edited December 7, 2012 by rjshae

[Gizmo]

Just out of curiosity, and assuming that there will be giant-sized creatures, if we take the mace from, say, a Storm Giant, will it scale down to the party proportions when we equip it? (Say, a two-handed mace-like weapon.) Or will it simply be unusable?

It might be neat if it was unusable to human size (or lower) PCs, but an option for larger non-human PCs ~and possibly humans with temporarily enhanced strength; it that's done, I'd want the weapon to drop or un-equip once the strength faded. It's bad when a game only checks if they can equip an item, but lets them keep using it after the buff has subsided.

 

I hope we get the best of ToEE in PE; [what's applicable I mean].

Edited December 7, 2012 by Gizmo

[Cluas]

Great to hear from Rob Nesler, a hell of an artist. He is a good writer too

[Jarmo]

Just out of curiosity, and assuming that there will be giant-sized creatures, if we take the mace from, say, a Storm Giant, will it scale down to the party proportions when we equip it? (Say, a two-handed mace-like weapon.) Or will it simply be unusable?

It might be neat if it was unusable to human size (or lower) PCs, but an option for larger non-human PCs ~and possibly humans with temporarily enhanced strength; it that's done, I'd want the weapon to drop or un-equip once the strength faded.

 

I'd hope you can use any weapon you can carry.

So it the requirement is 18 it's not impossible to use with strength 17 and effortless at 18.

Rather give maybe -1 to rolls per every lacking strength point,

so assuming giants club would have req of maybe 22, it'd still be -4 to a strong str 18 guy.

[rjshae]

^^^^

If they use weapon strength requirements in PE, then that approach would make a ton of sense. (Or possibly -1 per X Str points, depending on the scale.)

Edited December 7, 2012 by rjshae

[WorstUsernameEver]

Ehr.. if that comment got Rob angry I seriously hope he delegates the feedback gathering operation to someone else. NeoGAF is going down harsh on that WIP art.

[rjshae]

Ehr.. if that comment got Rob angry I seriously hope he delegates the feedback gathering operation to someone else. NeoGAF is going down harsh on that WIP art.

I think he called it right (about the first sentence being a bit of a Troll). Besides, it was an amusing reply... and there's no need to be so serious, mate.

Edited December 7, 2012 by rjshae

[Gizmo]

Just out of curiosity, and assuming that there will be giant-sized creatures, if we take the mace from, say, a Storm Giant, will it scale down to the party proportions when we equip it? (Say, a two-handed mace-like weapon.) Or will it simply be unusable?

It might be neat if it was unusable to human size (or lower) PCs, but an option for larger non-human PCs ~and possibly humans with temporarily enhanced strength; it that's done, I'd want the weapon to drop or un-equip once the strength faded.

 

I'd hope you can use any weapon you can carry.

So it the requirement is 18 it's not impossible to use with strength 17 and effortless at 18.

Rather give maybe -1 to rolls per every lacking strength point,

so assuming giants club would have req of maybe 22, it'd still be -4 to a strong str 18 guy.

This I wouldn't want... and this should explain why: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7-NQw3OxvY Edited December 7, 2012 by Gizmo

[Falkon Swiftblade]

I can't imagine why they wouldn't. But will they have backpacks?

 

Honestly, I'd like them to have a horse or creature that follows us around with bags on it to store things. I can't believe how much people can have their suspension of disbelief broken over things like 2 handed weapons being too long or heavy, fighting hundreds of baddies and that makes us stronger and not weaker? Even if you rested every day, I think it would wear you out hoofing it on foot days in and out killing dozens or hundreds of baddies every day. Or the fact we can carry entire sets of full gear on our person that weigh several hundred pounds realistically that we carry in magic bags, yet we could just have one packmule for everyone that follows the party couldn't we? Although I really do not like encumbrance mechanics in games. I don't like being limited in progressing. Partly because you are forced to pick up the loot to progress most of the time. Anyways, I digress

 

EDIT: since the internet can't read context, I just wanted to emphasize I'm speaking in hypotheticals and satire.

Edited December 7, 2012 by Falkon Swiftblade

[rjshae]

Gizmo:

 

Since Fallout 3 does not have a weapon strength requirement, you have failed to demonstrate your point. Besides, a sufficiently strong character (say one with biomechanical implants) should be able to wield that implement.

Edited December 7, 2012 by rjshae

[Jarmo]

 

I'd hope you can use any weapon you can carry.

....

 

so assuming giants club would have req of maybe 22, it'd still be -4 to a strong str 18 guy.

This I wouldn't want... and this should explain why: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7-NQw3OxvY

 

LOL. No.. that should be a 1000 pound weapon, hence can't carry it -> can't use it.

[sirchet]

I believe the weapon shown in the video is a modded weapon added by someone in the Fallout community.

 

No matter how careful the developers are, there will always be someone making WACKY weapons and chain mail bikinis.

 

By the way, I vote yay for the chain mail bikinis!

[rjshae]

By the way, I vote yay for the chain mail bikinis!

But will the cloth physics work for the chain mail bikini physics? They may have to jiggle the parameters a little.

[Mentoliptus]

The rendering of the house i very very similar to a historic building in out town, the Romanesque house:

[StrangeCat]

Hey thanks for the update even if it is completely and totally unimpresive. I like to see where your are direction is going for the world and creatures.

Cool to see the very basics but really there is no need.

It's like me posting a mix with out any of the FX on it.

Well of course. It's polite and useful commentary like this that I find particularly inspiring. I'll get right on this, just for you.

 

Why thank you sire and I tip my hat to you.

 

I look forward to the updates that show the art direction of the game. I know that is the basic of the basic.

For me however I would moderate what I show as the creation of my work. Of course you guys aren't trying to impress right now but show the process behind the development.

 

Keep doing the updates and stay positive.

[Gizmo]

Gizmo:

 

Since Fallout 3 does not have a weapon strength requirement, you have failed to demonstrate your point. Besides, a sufficiently strong character (say one with biomechanical implants) should be able to wield that implement.

Don't be absurd. Fallout 3 [of course] has nothing to do with the example; the imagery alone makes the idea laughable... the physics make it impossible even if they are strong enough to lift it. The video just demonstrates how silly it is. Edited December 7, 2012 by Gizmo