Game News Project Eternity Kickstarter Update #66: Backer Portal Promo + Meet the Devs

[Zombra]

I'm a little surprised that so many are praising the graphics in that screenshot. I mean ... I guess they're high resolution. That's nice. But wow, talk about bland. Is it just me?

 

[Sensuki]

Nope it's not just you. I think that both limited environment showings (Pillars of Adra and this Stronghold one) are a lot less impressive than the Waterfall scene ... almost a different style even - which is weird.

The Waterfall scene and the Dungeon screeny look great however.

I think they are both a work in progress though, and will probably receive a polish pass at a later stage in development.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Myeah, probably gonna be improved (the previous screenshots looked better), but it really doesn't look better than that Robin Hood game from about 10 years ago. Just higher-resolution. But people are starved for a nice looking 2D RPG, instead of the next cameraman simulator.

 

[Midair]

The resolution is too low. They should be planning for 2800+ horizontal resolutions becoming common by time of release. The sharp 2d graphics style could take particular advantage of it.

 

[AN4RCHID]

but lets take skyrim as an example - since we all know it.

Sure, take Skyrim. A game with a budget that is an order of magnitude larger than what PE has to work with, and as you pointed out, many of the systems necessary to create dynamic player forts in the game, like robust NPC scripting. Also, it's a game with dozens of NPC forts and hundreds of dungeons which could have been used as dynamic player strongholds. It's a game that's basically built from the ground up to feature a lot of generic, reusuble content. Bethesda still wasn't able to implement dynamic player strongholds until that Hearthfire DLC. PE is not going to be a game based on large amounts of generic content. It's going to be a game with a small amount of unique encounters and locations with hand-placed enemies. Additionally, Skyrim is an open-world sandbox game, so it would make some sense to let the player build a stronghold anywhere; PE is a linear dungeon-crawler, so it does not.

The stronghold is an optional feature.

Yes ... so? Or is it?

It is. Josh has stated that you don't have to spend any time at the stronghold, as it was a stretch goal and not part of the core design.

See also this quote from Josh on the OEI forums:

I really like this concept :D but I am wondering, is there a chance that... instead of restoring the west building simply into what is shown in the screenshot, could we replace the building with something else? (Stables, Tower/Outpost, Library etc. etc.) choices~ "What do you want to build?"-ish

Unfortunately, no. Swapping sections of the rendered 2D image is trickier than it may seem.

This isn't Skyrim where everything is made out of generic assets. For every potential stronghold, they would essentially have to design the area twice, plus reimplement all of the stronghold quests. Plus, as I said before, they would need to design a lot of areas with all the features of a stronghold, which means even less non-stronghold related content. That's a lot of optional content. With the two big cities and the optional mega-dungeon, expect the main game to be pretty short already. Adding more optional and redundant content is not a good idea.

 

[Surf Solar]

wat

 

[Scruffy]

HA! (cit.)

 

[hiver]

but lets take skyrim as an example - since we all know it.

Sure, take Skyrim. A game with a budget that is an order of magnitude larger than what PE has to work with, and as you pointed out, many of the systems necessary to create dynamic player forts in the game, like robust NPC scripting.

for fuck sake... Its not a directly comparable game. I said im using it as an example just to clearly describe in what manner things could be done. Generally speaking.
The differences in scope and resources are obvious to anyone.

- PE will have robust NPC scripting anyway. All RPGs do, more or less. (especially if youre going to call anything in a bethesda game "robust")

Also, it's a game with dozens of NPC forts and hundreds of dungeons which could have been used as dynamic player strongholds.

The exact amount and numbers are irrelevant. Despite what you may prefer to assume i never said that in PE each location should be a potential stronghold.
PE will have more then enough such locations in that huge world map.

It's a game that's basically built from the ground up to feature a lot of generic, reusuble content.

Every game is.

Bethesda still wasn't able to implement dynamic player strongholds until that Hearthfire DLC.

Because they had more pressing concerns. btw, Isnt hearthfire just a player house and not a stronghold?
Doesnt this directly undermine your previous statements how Skyrim was built for this shit from the ground up?

PE is not going to be a game based on large amounts of generic content.

Amounts dont fucking matter. It will have generic content as any RPG does. Unless you will claim that every single thing in the game will be a unique asset.

It's going to be a game with a small amount of unique encounters and locations with hand-placed enemies.

How the fuck do you know its going to be small?

Additionally, Skyrim is an open-world sandbox game, so it would make some sense to let the player build a stronghold anywhere; PE is a linear dungeon-crawler, so it does not.

Since when is PE a linear dungeon crawler? Linear as what? CoD? Or maybe like BG2 which was not THAT linear? Do we know exactly how linear it will be?

As for the retarded idea that linearity of the game is preventing stronghold to be built anywhere... how does that logic exactly work? Did linearity of BG2 prevent any of the strongholds to be a praised and valuable feature?
Who ever said that it should be built anywhere?
Why the fuck do i have to waste time convincing you that your starting overblown assumptions are not correct?

Didnt i say that devs could designate specific locations that could be used for this purpose in advance - instead of enabling every fucking location in the game to become a stronghold?

It is. Josh has stated that you don't have to spend any time at the stronghold, as it was a stretch goal and not part of the core design.

Since it now is - unless you will claim that stretch goals are something secondary to the game - wouldnt it be better to integrate it into the game in atleast some deeper ways then as an afterthought and shallow money sink?

Also...what fucking core design?
the game was invented during the fucking kickstarter.

See also this quote from Josh on the OEI forums:

I really like this concept :D but I am wondering, is there a chance that... instead of restoring the west building simply into what is shown in the screenshot, could we replace the building with something else? (Stables, Tower/Outpost, Library etc. etc.) choices~ "What do you want to build?"-ish

Unfortunately, no. Swapping sections of the rendered 2D image is trickier than it may seem.

This isn't Skyrim where everything is made out of generic assets. For every potential stronghold, they would essentially have to design the area twice,

There is no reason to design the area "TWICE". Stop overblowing everything just so you seem like youre right.
They are talking about a specific idea of changing the buildings inside this stronghold into something else. Changing one or two buildings does not amount to remaking the whole area TWICE.

plus reimplement all of the stronghold quests.

Thats just implementing quests - a pretty standard practice in game dev.

Plus, as I said before, they would need to design a lot of areas with all the features of a stronghold,

Nope. Just a few. Who said anything about a lot? Your brain that for some reason assumed i want hundreds of strongholds?

which means even less non-stronghold related content.

Since the previous assumption is bullshit this one follows it down the drain.

That's a lot of optional content.

A lot. Humongous. Huge. GIGANTIC!!!! ENOURMOUUUUUS!

With the two big cities and the optional mega-dungeon, expect the main game to be pretty short already.

Yep, two cities and mega dungeon (plus the whole world map) sure sound like something short.

Adding more optional and redundant content is not a good idea.

Only because you see it in that retarded way that you are practically forcing yourself.


In closing:

- Of course making something like im suggesting needs some additional work. The point is it doesnt demand so much work as you are preposterously claiming.
You also claim it would be redundant content - and my only answer to that is that you are a retard whose primary concern is to protect your previous ludicrous jumps to stupid assumptions, instead of actually thinking about value and potential of such a feature.

To you it isnt something worth the effort and you falsely over-inflate amount of effort needed to make your argument seem stronger.
This comes from you considering such a feature in its most shallow form, as some second hand cheap money sink and time waster. Or not at all. argumentium ignorantium.

Instead of what it was in BG2 and NWN2 - which can be further improved and more deeply integrated into the game and its story and setting and main quest and many smaller ones.
- which is the very reason people wanted to see a stronghold in the game. Not a player owned house.

 

[UnknownBro]

Manor of Eternity: Gardener Simulator

 

[AN4RCHID]

Okay, hiver.

Its not a directly comparable game. I said im using it as an example just to clearly describe in what manner things could be done. Generally speaking.

Sure, and things could not be done in this manner in PE, even generally speaking. It's outside the scope of the project.

- PE will have robust NPC scripting anyway. All RPGs do, more or less. (especially if youre going to call anything in a bethesda game "robust")

False. Skyrim had pretty good NPC scripting with schedules and random behaviors. I expect "AI" in PE to be pretty basic.

PE will have more then enough such locations in that huge world map.

Start downgrading your expectations. PE's world map isn't likely to be huge.

It's a game that's basically built from the ground up to feature a lot of generic, reusuble content.

Every game is.

Not in the same way the Elder Scrolls games are. Most of Skyrim was generic assets.

Bethesda still wasn't able to implement dynamic player strongholds until that Hearthfire DLC.

Because they had more pressing concerns.

Point? Obsidian doesn't?

btw, Isnt hearthfire just a player house and not a stronghold?
Doesnt this directly undermine your previous statements how Skyrim was built for this shit from the ground up?

Never claimed Skyrim was designed from the ground up for strongholds.

Amounts dont fucking matter. It will have generic content as any RPG does. Unless you will claim that every single thing in the game will be a unique asset.

Not everything will be unique obviously, but amounts do matter. This is a budget RPG.

It's going to be a game with a small amount of unique encounters and locations with hand-placed enemies.

How the fuck do you know its going to be small?

Budget and schedule.

Since when is PE a linear dungeon crawler?

The Kickstarter campaign.

Linear as what? CoD? Or maybe like BG2 which was not THAT linear? Do we know exactly how linear it will be?

Nope! Just that Josh has said it will be linear rather than open world. I encourage you to look up some of the Kickstarter videos if you would like to learn more about the game.

As for the retarded idea that linearity of the game is preventing stronghold to be built anywhere... how does that logic exactly work?

Because you are suggesting multiple optional areas that can be visited and conquered at anytime, which implies open world design.

Didnt i say that devs could designate specific locations that could be used for this purpose in advance - instead of enabling every fucking location in the game to become a stronghold?

I don't remember you saying that specifically, but then I'm not disputing that, so what is your point?

It is. Josh has stated that you don't have to spend any time at the stronghold, as it was a stretch goal and not part of the core design.

Since it now is - unless you will claim that stretch goals are something secondary to the game - wouldnt it be better to integrate it into the game in atleast some deeper ways then as an afterthought and shallow money sink?

It will be integrated into the story somehow. What makes you think it will be a shallow money sink? We already know there will be quests, gameplay bonuses for adding features like the hedge maze and forum, merchants who show up, and taxes earn the player money.

Also...what fucking core design?

Deep companions and mature themes of Planescape: Torment, tactical combat and dungeons of Icewind Dale, exploration nice 2D scenery of Buldur's Gate. As it was described during the campaign, a linear party-based class-based RTWP D&D inspired RPG. There were quite a few more details during the campaign about the games design.

They are talking about a specific idea of changing the buildings inside this stronghold into something else. Changing one or two buildings does not amount to remaking the whole area TWICE.

No, only remaking it once.

plus reimplement all of the stronghold quests.

Thats just implementing quests - a pretty standard practice in game dev.

That's some keen insight into the industry there.

Plus, as I said before, they would need to design a lot of areas with all the features of a stronghold,

Nope. Just a few. Who said anything about a lot? Your brain that for some reason assumed i want hundreds of strongholds?

"If it was me doing the game, the players would have an option of simply taking over various such appropriate locations used by enemies and then setting up their own stronghold there." -Hiver

which means even less non-stronghold related content.

Since the previous assumption is bullshit this one follows it down the drain.

"Simply - the locations or dungeons that need to be used for other quest would not be a part of this." -Hiver

That's a lot of optional content.

A lot. Humongous. Huge. GIGANTIC!!!! ENOURMOUUUUUS!

Yep. One stronghold is already a lot of optional content. Two or three would be lots more.

With the two big cities and the optional mega-dungeon, expect the main game to be pretty short already.

Yep, two cities and mega dungeon (plus the whole world map) sure sound like something short.

The cities will likely have a ton of sidequests, and the megadungeon is totally optional. Presumably we would all like to see some non-optional content in the game as well?

Adding more optional and redundant content is not a good idea.

Only because you see it in that retarded way that you are practically forcing yourself.

Than explain why redundancy is good in a game with a very limited amount of development time and budget. Should there be two companions of the same class? It wouldn't be a bad thing, except that you are taking away resources from non-redundant features. In the same way, making multiple versions of the stronghold is a bad return on investment.

To you it isnt something worth the effort and you falsely over-inflate amount of effort needed to make your argument seem stronger.

It's a fine idea, just not necessary. So yes, not worth the effort.

This comes from you considering such a feature in its most shallow form, as some second hand cheap money sink and time waster.

Not at all.

Instead of what it was in BG2 and NWN2 - which can be further improved and more deeply integrated into the game and its story and setting and main quest and many smaller ones.
- which is the very reason people wanted to see a stronghold in the game. Not a player owned house.

Yes, that's exactly how I expect the PE stronghold to be. This is basically irrelevant to your idea of taking over random enemy forts.

Hope I answered all your questions.

 

[Infinitron]

PE is not going to be a "linear dungeon crawler" a-la Icewind Dale. Whether it will be closer to the BG1 model or the BG2 model (or perhaps something else entirely) remains to be seen.

 

[tuluse]

It's going to be a open dungeon crawler

 

[AN4RCHID]

Maybe dungeon crawler was a bad choice of terms, I do expect it to have more NPC interaction than Icewind Dale. I remember Josh saying it would be basically linear.

 

[hiver]

What a retard. My idea for taking any of the most of the enemy strongholds was for skyrim you imbecile.
And your still making claims you have no way to support or just splurging things that arent real anywhere except your stupid head.

-also-

http://www.moddb.com/games/project-eternity/images/world-map

 

[AN4RCHID]

What a retard. My idea for taking any of the most of the enemy strongholds was for skyrim you imbecile.
And your still making claims you have no way to support or just splurging things that arent real anywhere except your stupid head.

No it wasn't you fucking manboon, you hadn't even mentioned Skyrim at that point in your post.

While PE doesnt have to have a different "stronghold" for each class they could atleast made two or three that the player can choose himself. Or if not that, they could allow players to "rebuild" a specific place in few different styles to fit their preferences.
If it was me doing the game, the players would have an option of simply taking over various such appropriate locations used by enemies and then setting up their own stronghold there.

 

[hiver]

ACTUALLY:

While PE doesnt have to have a different "stronghold" for each class they could atleast made two or three that the player can choose himself. Or if not that, they could allow players to "rebuild" a specific place in few different styles to fit their preferences.
If it was me doing the game, the players would have an option of simply taking over various such appropriate locations used by enemies and then setting up their own stronghold there.
(i was really pissed that there was no option like this in Skyrim, among many other things - if i just attacked a fort or a cave or dungeon of whatever and cleaned it - killed everyone - then i should be able to claim it for myself)

TWO OR THREE you fucking moron.

And a whole sentance more which you conveniently left out and went into idiotic assumptions -. Because youre a fucking imbecile who doesnt read everything but takes one fucking sentence - because youre fucking STUPID - and then jump to idiotic conclusions.


btw im counting about 40 locations on that map of PE world.

 

[Roguey]

Maybe dungeon crawler was a bad choice of terms, I do expect it to have more NPC interaction than Icewind Dale. I remember Josh saying it would be basically linear.

I remember him saying it wouldn't be that.
http://www.gamebanshee.com/interviews/109792-project-eternity-interview.html

Josh: I'd like to avoid linear sequences whenever possible, but there are usually a few choke points the player will have to go through even in open games. For example, you have to get the water chip and deal with the Master in Fallout. There are a lot of ways to actually do those things, but you can't avoid dealing with them in some way. That's as "linear" as I'd like to get.

 

[FeelTheRads]

btw im counting about 40 locations on that map of PE world.

Most of which probably are like the locations on the IWD2 map.
That's non-existent if you don't get it.

 

[hiver]

HUEHUEHUE

I dont remember those locations in IWD being visible on the map at all at any time. Only the main ones. And that "probably" means shit right now.

They are on the map. Asshole claimed this will be some sort of short linear game. Count them.

 

[tuluse]

btw im counting about 40 locations on that map of PE world.

Most of which probably are like the locations on the IWD2 map.
That's non-existent if you don't get it.

I feel kind of bad after reading this post. Like you just told Hiver Santa Claus isn't real.

 

[FeelTheRads]

I dont remember those locations in IWD being visible on the map at all at any time.

The fuck are you talking about? Can you even read? I've just said they were on the map but non-existent in the game.
IWD2 not IWD.

 

[FeelTheRads]

I feel kind of bad after reading this post. Like you just told Hiver Santa Claus isn't real.

That's how I felt when I found out those locations didn't exist.

 

[AN4RCHID]

Maybe dungeon crawler was a bad choice of terms, I do expect it to have more NPC interaction than Icewind Dale. I remember Josh saying it would be basically linear.

I remember him saying it wouldn't be that.
http://www.gamebanshee.com/interviews/109792-project-eternity-interview.html

Josh: I'd like to avoid linear sequences whenever possible, but there are usually a few choke points the player will have to go through even in open games. For example, you have to get the water chip and deal with the Master in Fallout. There are a lot of ways to actually do those things, but you can't avoid dealing with them in some way. That's as "linear" as I'd like to get.

Hmmm... maybe I was thinking of this:

What sort of play model are we talking? Open-world? The whole story at once? Episodic?

We intend to follow the model of the Infinity Engine games, so there’s dungeon crawling and exploration at points across multiple levels, all toward a final end goal.

 

[hiver]

I've just said they were on the map but non-existent in the game.

lul wut?

and you still want me to take your "probably" seriously? seriously?

I feel kind of bad after reading this post. Like you just told Hiver Santa Claus isn't real.

He was never real. Hogfather is though.

-edit--

Wait!

its actually about 60 locations in the full map

And it looks so linear.

 

[Sensuki]

but lets take skyrim as an example - since we all know it.

No we don't. Don't own it, never played it.