Sensuki Posted October 18, 2014 Author Posted October 18, 2014 I just want to say I cannot thank you enough Sensuki for all your hard work on this game. Cheers (y). IMO the grass cut to at ankle height would remove alot of its ugliness.No grass just wouldn't look that great. Yeah that would have probably been a bit better. It's more noticeable for shorter characters - Orlans and Dwarves.
Pipyui Posted October 19, 2014 Posted October 19, 2014 I'm too very disappointed to see that foliage animation was taken from the game. Granted, in that original mockup video, the trees and brush looked pretty awkward, but the tall grass looked just fine. And if you mean the physical interaction with characters when you say grass "sorting," I don't think we even need that at all - just give it regular occlusion. The falling-leaves effect is nice too I suppose, but it'll be awkward to see stormwinds simulated in fog and such (as we've seen in the gameplay video, and as evidenced by that soul-sucking storm thingy) if the foliage just sits still as stone (extra bonus disappointment if the falling-leaves effect stays so leisurely too). Speaking of occulsion with brush, how's it look currently in the beta when walking through? I'm kinda curious if it's layered, or purely binary, or if brush can't be traversed directly through at all. It's an interesting problem having to simulate interaction between 2D and 3D game elements.
Sensuki Posted October 19, 2014 Author Posted October 19, 2014 I think I demonstrate that in video 3, there's no occlusion just (awkward) sorting. 1
IndiraLightfoot Posted October 19, 2014 Posted October 19, 2014 EDIT: also, just watched this again Is it me or all the character models in that video look much sharper (less transparent/fuzzy) than in the current BB version? Nice find! Wow! That's almost on par with WL2. What the hell happened? *** "The words of someone who feels ever more the ent among saplings when playing CRPGs" ***
Lychnidos Posted October 19, 2014 Posted October 19, 2014 EDIT: also, just watched this again Is it me or all the character models in that video look much sharper (less transparent/fuzzy) than in the current BB version? Nice find! Wow! That's almost on par with WL2. What the hell happened? The armour colours look quite more saturated then they are now.
Seari Posted October 19, 2014 Posted October 19, 2014 They changed it because when the teaser first came out there were a LOT of complaints about the characters standing out too much from the background. 1
Pipyui Posted October 19, 2014 Posted October 19, 2014 I think I demonstrate that in video 3, there's no occlusion just (awkward) sorting. Ah, my bad. I hadn't gotten down to the third video at that time. You're right about the sorting - I think the brain-bender there is that the brush has to simulate 3D sorting while it itself is a 2D image, and the depth comes out warped as consequent. Seeing it reminds me of those impossible images that hopefully explain my point better than I can: I wouldn't know a solution to that problem though.
constantine Posted October 19, 2014 Posted October 19, 2014 I don't think the moving trees/grass looked very good in that video though, what they were basically doing is moving sections of the flat image left and right. I think they cut the feature because they couldn't get it to look right. They could have made tall grass a 3D object or something like water, but I'm not sure if they've experimented with that before. I think the tall grass and the character sorting in it doesn't look that great tbh, rather just have flat grass like in the IE games, YMMV. Better there and looking ugly (i like them though) than not there at all. Matilda is a Natlan woman born and raised in Old Vailia. She managed to earn status as a mercenary for being a professional who gets the job done, more so when the job involves putting her excellent fighting abilities to good use.
cdx Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 In my opinion not there at all is way better than being there and looking ugly. Plus, I imagine they are saving a massive amount of work without it. Great points in the videos Sensuki, from what I've seen in the game and what I hope Obsidian would change. One thing I feel very strongly about is the backer NPCs. I hate the idea that they are marked as such. I pledged as much as I could to support Project Eternity, not to show off my name in the game. I really hope they either find a way to integrate the backer NPCs in a way consistent with the rest of the NPCs or do a toggle for any obvious signs with "Off" being the default. The "contributor" stuff should be in the credits, not in the game. Only my opinion as an NPC backer, maybe others like it the current way. As for the character description provided by the backers, if conversations aren't possible as being too much work maybe a note/letter in the inventory would do. One that makes sense in-game and certainly without "Backed by ...". Or maybe a explanation by another NPC which has a big conversation tree (e.g. Dengler or Sid for the inn NPCs), etc.
Sensuki Posted October 21, 2014 Author Posted October 21, 2014 (edited) I think a slightly different color name tooltip would be okay. Although at the moment, backer NPCs just seem to be flavor NPCs. They don't have any dialogue or anything yet and aren't integrated into the game's story/quests which seems very disappointing. I imagine some backers (not necessarily everyone) will be disappointed by that. I think the Item backers got better 'value for money' in this instance. Edited October 21, 2014 by Sensuki
cdx Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 The value is in supporting Obsidian As for what we get, integration would be nice but a blank slate is perfect for modding If there are enough people interested organising a semi-official backer NPC mod would be nice. Plenty of time for this, though. Ideally, I'd rather have the backer NPCs undistinguishable form all the rest, just like Dengler. At the very least, it should be an option to switch off the tooltip colour, etc. As you said, it's quite immersion breaking.
Naurgalen Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 (edited) The trees & grass movement is a complicated thing, while I understand that some people prefer not having it because it "looks ugly" (I disagree, for me it is more a thing of how it is animated than how it looks) the problem of not having animations affects not only "the looks" but the ambient/mood of the place. Slowly moving foliage can totally change the feel from a peaceful village vs a windy one in the top of a mountain. And worse: There can be immersion problems if we have other things being moved by the wind and not the trees/bushes (windmill, smoke, tavern posters, rain, leafs etc...). Those things I would feel strange in a second. Edited October 21, 2014 by Naurgalen 1
Lephys Posted October 23, 2014 Posted October 23, 2014 I did point out specific colors that were lacking in shades compared to others - such as purple. I don't understand, Sensuki. Why do the color options need to be balanced?! THIS ISN'T A MULTIPLAYER GAME! /jest Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u
Recommended Posts