- Joined
- Oct 21, 2002
- Messages
- 17,068
Tags: Baldur's Gate; Black Isle Studios; Eternity; Fallout; Game design; GOTY 2018; Icewind Dale; J.E. Sawyer; Obsidian Entertainment; Pillars of Eternity; Planescape: Torment
So, here we are, with the responses to our community-sourced questions for Obsidian regarding Project Eternity. Or just Eternity. I really am not sure whether they have dropped the 'Project' bit or not. In any case, project director Josh Sawyer took it upon himself to answers all the questions we had. Well, pretty much all of them. There were a lot of questions.
Here's a wetter:
It's pretty lengthy so grab a (healthy) snack and relax (moderately).
Read the full article: RPG Codex community Q&A: Project Eternity with Josh Sawyer
So, here we are, with the responses to our community-sourced questions for Obsidian regarding Project Eternity. Or just Eternity. I really am not sure whether they have dropped the 'Project' bit or not. In any case, project director Josh Sawyer took it upon himself to answers all the questions we had. Well, pretty much all of them. There were a lot of questions.
Here's a wetter:
Hormalakh asked his cat, but his cat won't answer:
Can you discuss what the different animal companions will be for the ranger and whether these companions will play any differently? Will they offer different tactical/strategic choices in combat, different choices in the story, or will their differences just be for flavor?
It is more likely that they will offer different tactical choices than story choices, but we want to make the differences more than just cosmetic. We don't have a full animal companion list yet because we're still developing our bestiary.
Kem0sabe has more faith in his question than in developers:
At this point is there a risk that Obsidian is obsessing over particular areas of the game, like the design of rules and mechanics, leading to an over-designed game with too many discreet systems?
Given the choice between an over-designed game and an under-designed game, I'd prefer the former, but I think the risk is low. We design a lot of the fundamental mechanics up front and let the other systems or pieces of content develop more organically as the project progresses.
For example, the classes were initially designed from levels 1-5 and done in waves (starting with the "core four"). We're not going to develop the remaining character levels until we've played around with the classes in the low range for a while. Doing so will allow us to adapt the classes' remaining content and even adjust their core mechanics if we feel it is necessary.
Rake took a minute to describe the environment before asking:
What are your thoughts on descriptive text in the log and in dialogues? It's more of a Fallout thing than an IE one, but Planescape:Torment had it and was better for it. Do you think it offers much to an isometric game fleshing out the world to be worth the effort?
We are currently writing our dialogues with descriptive text in the general style of Planescape: Torment. We don't use it on every node, but we do use it when we feel it adds something to the conversation.
Can you discuss what the different animal companions will be for the ranger and whether these companions will play any differently? Will they offer different tactical/strategic choices in combat, different choices in the story, or will their differences just be for flavor?
It is more likely that they will offer different tactical choices than story choices, but we want to make the differences more than just cosmetic. We don't have a full animal companion list yet because we're still developing our bestiary.
Kem0sabe has more faith in his question than in developers:
At this point is there a risk that Obsidian is obsessing over particular areas of the game, like the design of rules and mechanics, leading to an over-designed game with too many discreet systems?
Given the choice between an over-designed game and an under-designed game, I'd prefer the former, but I think the risk is low. We design a lot of the fundamental mechanics up front and let the other systems or pieces of content develop more organically as the project progresses.
For example, the classes were initially designed from levels 1-5 and done in waves (starting with the "core four"). We're not going to develop the remaining character levels until we've played around with the classes in the low range for a while. Doing so will allow us to adapt the classes' remaining content and even adjust their core mechanics if we feel it is necessary.
Rake took a minute to describe the environment before asking:
What are your thoughts on descriptive text in the log and in dialogues? It's more of a Fallout thing than an IE one, but Planescape:Torment had it and was better for it. Do you think it offers much to an isometric game fleshing out the world to be worth the effort?
We are currently writing our dialogues with descriptive text in the general style of Planescape: Torment. We don't use it on every node, but we do use it when we feel it adds something to the conversation.
It's pretty lengthy so grab a (healthy) snack and relax (moderately).
Read the full article: RPG Codex community Q&A: Project Eternity with Josh Sawyer