Regarding art assets of PoE and TToN (*clarified!)

[AirBreather]

This poll and thread is a 're-launch' attempt of another thread (@ http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/65236-co-operate-with-torment-ton-in-allowing-shared-art-assets/ ), with clearer languaging around the (now multiple) poll questions.

The really key thing that would make this happen (or not!) in any form is dev interest, of course, and that is what these threads/posts will hopefully stimulate.

 

For myself,

Q1: Yes - of course. :D

Q2: Only if the devs feel like it. Not attached either way.

Q3: As Q2.

 

Cheers!

Edited March 2, 2014 by AirBreather

[Fatback]

I'll throw a bone the settings of the two games are very different so I don't think that a lot of art asset sharing will happen and shouldn't.

[nikolokolus]

Call me crazy, but when I eventually fire up Torment I expect it to look, feel and play differently from Pillars of Eternity ... as if two different companies and teams of developers worked on them to create two games with distinctive art and design styles, coincident with their respective genres (dying Earth and late medieval period respectively).

 

Maybe some people like that Icewind Dale, Baldur's Gate and Planescape all looked so "samey." I'm not one of those people.

[Quetzalcoatl]

Maybe some people like that Icewind Dale, Baldur's Gate and Planescape all looked so "samey." I'm not one of those people.

Really? I thought they all looked distinctly different and had their own unique look. It's one of my favorite things about the Infinity Engine games, in fact.

 

That being said, I agree that I don't quite see the merit of sharing specific art assets between this project and Numenera.

 

 

[Elerond]

Answer to all questions is I will let developers decided what the see to be best for them and for the games.

[Quadrone]

Nobody cares.

 

Short and to the point.

[MReed]

I'm rather surprised that this is getting such a hostile reception.  I don't particularly support it, and I suspect that the licensing issues would make this unfeasible to implement, it seems a reasonable request.

 

There seem to be two major objections:

 

1) "I don't want Obsidian to try to 'save money' by levering art resources from inXile (or vice versa)":

2) "I don't want potential future modders to be able to leverage art resources from Torment in a Pillars mod (or vice versa)."

 

#1 I agree with 100% -- but it worth pointing out that the OP that started all of this never even envisioned this use case...

 

#2 I don't understand -- yes, obviously Torment and Pillars occur in very different worlds, but a simple wilderness area probably looks more or less identical in both, and I suspect that some interiors would have similar enough look and feel to "fit in" well enough.  As the OP pointed out, several modders attempted to leverage IWD area artwork in BG2 mods, so there is certainly precedent for modders believing that artwork could be leveraged in this way.

 

Given that we have been told flat-out that generating area artwork will likely be beyond the capabilities of most modders, and given that both games are using a common engine for area artwork....

[Pipyui]

We know that rigging animations and model skeletons is expensive, and that PoE is already inevitably going to be reusing them between creatures (as the devs have said) to add variety without too much expense.  I can't see why some animated rigs created by inXile or Obs can't be shared between the two games where appropriate.  A gangly man-rat in Eternity could translate to some twisted gollum-thing in Numenera - if shared, the devs would have more animated rigs to choose from and spread around in both teams to create more diversity of critter in each.

[teknoman2]

this thread is bad and you should feel bad.

now for the more serious part

both games will have modding support. what modders do with the art is up to them so long as they dont do anything illegal. so if they want to use one game's assets for a mod for the other i dont think there would be a problem

sharing art assets or not, is up to the 2 companies to decide. if it is useful to their work and profitable in the long run they will... if not they wont! no matter what the result of this poll is, they will do what they know is best

so this is a pointless poll

Edited March 3, 2014 by teknoman2

[Tauron]

I am not against that they might work together in some way. Still, they are seasoned gamers and developers in this particular genre. Imo it is best left to them to decide lvl of interaction. I am not thinking of art as I would acually like to see 2 visually distinctive universes, but content writers brainstorming and helping eachother is ok, maybe they are already doing it unofficially as some of these people know eachother...and as such I find this thread  usless.

 

I hope you dont see this as "hostile" answer, becouse it is not meant as such. I belive this is "stupid" thread, becouse it really does not add anything positive in any way to any of the games while being developed. If in 10 years we see kickstarter campain, entitled going back to roots of unity games, than something somewhere went wrong again.

 

Almost evrything you mentioned in the poll can be in some lvl obtained by community after game has been finished. Modding capabilities obviously is another matter and there has been already thread about what some players would like to see as moddable by community.

[AirBreather]

Well, some discussion coming up, and thanks for all that. I'll do some snipping and replying.

 

 

I'm rather surprised that this is getting such a hostile reception.  I don't particularly support it, and I suspect that the licensing issues would make this unfeasible to implement, it seems a reasonable request.

 

There seem to be two major objections:

 

1) "I don't want Obsidian to try to 'save money' by levering art resources from inXile (or vice versa)":

2) "I don't want potential future modders to be able to leverage art resources from Torment in a Pillars mod (or vice versa)."

 

#1 I agree with 100% -- but it worth pointing out that the OP that started all of this never even envisioned this use case...

 

#2 I don't understand -- yes, obviously Torment and Pillars occur in very different worlds, but a simple wilderness area probably looks more or less identical in both, and I suspect that some interiors would have similar enough look and feel to "fit in" well enough.  As the OP pointed out, several modders attempted to leverage IWD area artwork in BG2 mods, so there is certainly precedent for modders believing that artwork could be leveraged in this way.

 

Given that we have been told flat-out that generating area artwork will likely be beyond the capabilities of most modders, and given that both games are using a common engine for area artwork....

 

Thank you for being a voice of reason. Feel like you are the only person that gets completely where I am coming from. :D

 

 

this thread is bad and you should feel bad.

now for the more serious part

both games will have modding support. what modders do with the art is up to them so long as they dont do anything illegal. so if they want to use one game's assets for a mod for the other i dont think there would be a problem

sharing art assets or not, is up to the 2 companies to decide. if it is useful to their work and profitable in the long run they will... if not they wont! no matter what the result of this poll is, they will do what they know is best

so this is a pointless poll

 

 

*SNIP*...and as such I find this thread  usless.

 

I hope you dont see this as "hostile" answer, becouse it is not meant as such. I belive this is "stupid" thread, becouse it really does not add anything positive in any way to any of the games while being developed. If in 10 years we see kickstarter campain, entitled going back to roots of unity games, than something somewhere went wrong again.

 

Almost evrything you mentioned in the poll can be in some lvl obtained by community after game has been finished. Modding capabilities obviously is another matter and there has been already thread about what some players would like to see as moddable by community.

 

If anything, I have the following 'goals' by these two threads and polls:

 

1) To draw attention to the shared engine natures of the two games, by anyone (including devs, fans, backers, etc).

2) To avoid, by laying of a co-operative ground work between these two dev teams, the conflicts that occurred in IWD/BG days by a sort of prepatory "fair useage" agreement or something. Specifically to avoid the rendering 'illegal', banned, etc, of the use of one games asset's into another.

 

Point #1 has succeeded. Even moreso when somebody says "Nobody cares." Can you grok the inherent contradiction in that statement?

 

Point #2 remains to be seen, as it is more of an IP thing than an engine thing. If all it takes is both games being present on the mod-makers and mod-user's system, well then... All good!

 

I am quite aware that this thread, poll and so on may be completely useless and unnecessary if there are no plans for restricting content or having non-compatible assets. :D In such a case, modders would be using those assets and absolutely no 'prep work' would be required by devs.

 

However, IF the devs explicity state that they are forbidding the sharing of assets between titles, this thread is NOT useless because it can then draw interest to... Not doing that!

 

Any official statements would help a lot.

 

[MReed]

...so long as they dont do anything illegal. so if they want to use one game's assets for a mod for the other i dont think there would be a problem...

 

But the whole point of this thread is the Black Isle Studio stated, quite unequivocally, that is was illegal to distribute art assets from (say) IWD2 in a mod for BG2 -- and that's when both games were made by the same company.  The underlying issue was that there wasn't (& isn't) any way to ensure that IWD2 assets are only used in a BG2 installation when both products are installed.  There are a couple of potential technical solutions to this issue:

 

1) Modders can't use assets from one game in another, even though they are fully compatible, because of IP issues.  This is pretty much the default position, obviously.

2) An official program is designed to install / uninstall mods in general, and this program would support an instruction that reads "Rather than installing this file from the files distributed with the mod, look for product X, extract this resource XYZ from there and place the asset here."  This is what the OP is requesting.

 

Under #2, the OP would also like either / both Obsidian and inXile to offer an "asset only" license, that doesn't include the game, but includes the assets in a form that the mod installer in #2 will recognize as valid -- this will allow people who are only interested in one title to install mods that require assets for the other without having to install both products.

 

#2 would obviously require a significant amount of effort on the part of one or both companies -- given that neither of which has even agreed to provide mod support beyond "We'll document our file structure" this seems unlikely, at least at this point (I suspect that a final announcement of the level of mod support provided will not occur until the games are released, and will be based on how much funding is left over after implementing the game).  And given that there are two separate companies involved, it really seems unlikely to me that they would be able to reach an agreement like this, but...

 

Certainly nothing wrong with asking...

[Zeckul]

The file formats might not be compatible. TToN is licensing the tech, but has already indicated they intend to modify it to suit their particular needs.

 

My take is that any effort on both teams to accomplish this would be better spent making the best possible games they can. If it's just a matter of licensing then ok, but I doubt it'd be as simple as that.

[teknoman2]

 

...so long as they dont do anything illegal. so if they want to use one game's assets for a mod for the other i dont think there would be a problem...

 

But the whole point of this thread is the Black Isle Studio stated, quite unequivocally, that is was illegal to distribute art assets from (say) IWD2 in a mod for BG2 -- and that's when both games were made by the same company.  The underlying issue was that there wasn't (& isn't) any way to ensure that IWD2 assets are only used in a BG2 installation when both products are installed.  There are a couple of potential technical solutions to this issue:

 

1) Modders can't use assets from one game in another, even though they are fully compatible, because of IP issues.  This is pretty much the default position, obviously.

2) An official program is designed to install / uninstall mods in general, and this program would support an instruction that reads "Rather than installing this file from the files distributed with the mod, look for product X, extract this resource XYZ from there and place the asset here."  This is what the OP is requesting.

 

Under #2, the OP would also like either / both Obsidian and inXile to offer an "asset only" license, that doesn't include the game, but includes the assets in a form that the mod installer in #2 will recognize as valid -- this will allow people who are only interested in one title to install mods that require assets for the other without having to install both products.

 

#2 would obviously require a significant amount of effort on the part of one or both companies -- given that neither of which has even agreed to provide mod support beyond "We'll document our file structure" this seems unlikely, at least at this point (I suspect that a final announcement of the level of mod support provided will not occur until the games are released, and will be based on how much funding is left over after implementing the game).  And given that there are two separate companies involved, it really seems unlikely to me that they would be able to reach an agreement like this, but...

 

Certainly nothing wrong with asking...

 

well im not a big fan of mods so i did not know the topic was from a modder's perspective. and i had no idea about that art asset thing been illegal

[Tauron]

 

*SNIP*...and as such I find this thread  usless.

 

I hope you dont see this as "hostile" answer, becouse it is not meant as such. I belive this is "stupid" thread, becouse it really does not add anything positive in any way to any of the games while being developed. If in 10 years we see kickstarter campain, entitled going back to roots of unity games, than something somewhere went wrong again.

 

Almost evrything you mentioned in the poll can be in some lvl obtained by community after game has been finished. Modding capabilities obviously is another matter and there has been already thread about what some players would like to see as moddable by community.

 

If anything, I have the following 'goals' by these two threads and polls:

 

1) To draw attention to the shared engine natures of the two games, by anyone (including devs, fans, backers, etc).

2) To avoid, by laying of a co-operative ground work between these two dev teams, the conflicts that occurred in IWD/BG days by a sort of prepatory "fair useage" agreement or something. Specifically to avoid the rendering 'illegal', banned, etc, of the use of one games asset's into another.

 

Point #1 has succeeded. Even moreso when somebody says "Nobody cares." Can you grok the inherent contradiction in that statement?

 

Point #2 remains to be seen, as it is more of an IP thing than an engine thing. If all it takes is both games being present on the mod-makers and mod-user's system, well then... All good!

 

I am quite aware that this thread, poll and so on may be completely useless and unnecessary if there are no plans for restricting content or having non-compatible assets. :D In such a case, modders would be using those assets and absolutely no 'prep work' would be required by devs.

 

However, IF the devs explicity state that they are forbidding the sharing of assets between titles, this thread is NOT useless because it can then draw interest to... Not doing that!

 

Any official statements would help a lot.

 

Lovely how you give yourself credit where no credit's due...yet at least. Optimistic of you. You go for it.

 

Well devs could answer you. If you wanted an official statment, why not just contact Obsidian more directly, than like this? Than, upon nature of their answer make a thread and eventually poll.

[JFSOCC]

I think it's an excellent idea to have all art assets available for modders. Having interiors and areas from T:ToN available for modders of PoE would fill a void created by the design choices of PoE, making it hard to create new areas. I'm sure creative use allows these art assets to be implemented by fans in ways respecting the setting despite the differences between the two games.

 

I would be very pleased to see a large database of art assets modders could use and this is an excellent method of increasing the database not jsut for PoE but for T:Ton as well.

 

The unaltered games would still each have their own assets with little to no overlap, so no-one needs to be worried to find the same area in both games.

[Infinitron]

https://torment.uservoice.com/forums/197950-game-ideas/suggestions/5584076-co-operate-with-pillars-of-eternity-in-allowing-sh#/
 

We don’t plan to intentionally make sharing assets between TToN and PE difficult for modders, but it is probably not very practical. The games’ different art styles would be an aesthetic challenge. There are technical challenges as well, such as different animation systems that will prevent characters made for one game from just automatically working with the other. And, as you noted, IP rights are another consideration.
Mod support isn’t currently included in TToN’s plans – our emphasis is on making the core game the best it can be.

Edited March 14, 2014 by Infinitron

[AirBreather]

 

https://torment.uservoice.com/forums/197950-game-ideas/suggestions/5584076-co-operate-with-pillars-of-eternity-in-allowing-sh#/

 

We don’t plan to intentionally make sharing assets between TToN and PE difficult for modders, but it is probably not very practical. The games’ different art styles would be an aesthetic challenge. There are technical challenges as well, such as different animation systems that will prevent characters made for one game from just automatically working with the other. And, as you noted, IP rights are another consideration.

Mod support isn’t currently included in TToN’s plans – our emphasis is on making the core game the best it can be.

 

 

Awesome, thanks for the update/link to the official word (from at least one dev team).

 

No word on whether things will be actively forbidden... Hmm. Sounds like it will be quite an interesting artistic divergence. Will have to wait and see!

[JFSOCC]

https://torment.uservoice.com/forums/197950-game-ideas/suggestions/5584076-co-operate-with-pillars-of-eternity-in-allowing-sh#/

 

We don’t plan to intentionally make sharing assets between TToN and PE difficult for modders, but it is probably not very practical. The games’ different art styles would be an aesthetic challenge. There are technical challenges as well, such as different animation systems that will prevent characters made for one game from just automatically working with the other. And, as you noted, IP rights are another consideration.

Mod support isn’t currently included in TToN’s plans – our emphasis is on making the core game the best it can be.

 

balls. that's a bunch of disappointments in a row, something good better come along.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 That's a bunch of disappointments in a row, something good better come along.

 

 

There is: Divinity of Original Sin, with a complete toolset! I will definitely give it a whirl when it's released in a couple of months.

[rjshae]

Answer to all questions is I will let developers decided what the see to be best for them and for the games.

 

It hardly matters whether you let them or not, but I agree otherwise. They've already made a commitment to allow modding, so the point seems moot.