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.