Vapourware Would you like an RPG that switches between 1st person / isometric?

[luj1]

Good thread

 

[AetherVagrant]

I vastly prefer ROA and Krondor/Antara style over classic blobber. I don't mind exploration being in first-person but I absolutely detest party-based combat that way. If I have a party I want isometric, turn-based. No party...real time 3rd or 1st person is fine. Breaks my immurshun and feels like final fantasy otherwise.

 

[gaussgunner]

It's true that, in some ways, it would limit what can be done in each view. I'll probably not allow the player to squeeze the party through a pipe and then have a battle there, so some constrains and compromises would be necessary, but in the end it's a tradeoff which, for now, I think is worth it. We'll find out!

I think it's worse than that. For iso you want a big world with low detail, designed to be viewed from only one angle. For first-person you need high detail from all angles, and to make it more realistic you'll need moveable furniture, doors, climbing, jumping, all that shit. It's a lot of modeling work. Also, those details could be interesting in combat, but implementation will be a bitch. Sounds like too much for one game.

I want to make an "exploration" rpg sometime if I can get a team together. Completely different feel from a party-based rpg, more like action rpg without the shit combat. Realtime, close-up iso camera (or maybe over-the-shoulder or first person) so it feels like you're hunting or tracking, with horrors lurking just off screen, and some tasteful jump scares. It's not a fully formed idea yet. Gotta do some prototyping and see what feels right.

 

[Keldryn]

I am positive about third person combat on separate screens, but for a game that would simply switch camera to top down view on combat... wouldn't designing map that would be interesting for both first person exploration and top down combat be difficult?

It definitely needs careful design. Especially if the turn-based combat uses a grid.

Interesting environments in 1st person or over-the-shoulder 3rd person views tend to make good use of the vertical dimension, which grids do not handle well. Just having uneven terrain can make fitting a grid to it quite difficult. You also need to design the environments where combat will take place such that they conform to the grid. You can do a fair bit to disguise this (Wasteland 2 did a reasonable job here), but it makes for a lot of work. If you're fortunate enough to be able to have all of your environment art built specifically for the game, you can accomplish this much easier. If you have to rely on Asset Store or Marketplace environment models, it's an endless source of headaches.

It's true that, in some ways, it would limit what can be done in each view. I'll probably not allow the player to squeeze the party through a pipe and then have a battle there, so some constrains and compromises would be necessary, but in the end it's a tradeoff which, for now, I think is worth it. We'll find out!

Yeah, I think you'd want to go with deliberately planned & designed encounters and avoid the random "you can get attacked anywhere!" thing. Especially with grid-based combat. If you've got a system that works more like Divinity: OS, then you have a bit more freedom here. But you still need a lot of horizontal space so that combatants can actually move around. Interior spaces generally need to be much larger on the horizontal dimension as well, which could easily feel odd when exploring them in 1st/3rd POV.

I would argue that the reason it worked well in games like Pool of Radiance is less about the graphics being simple and more about the presentation being at a more abstract level. Detailed, high-def art is part of what makes modern game presentation less abstract. But things like 10' steps and instant 90 degree turns versus continuous movement also contribute. There are no NPCs wandering around Phlan in PoR; it's implied or stated in the text that people are going about their daily activities.

 

[Excommunicator]

It can work but I'd never ask for a game with two different POVs. Unless you have money to waste, it will be an uphill battle.


But don't let that stop you

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

The idea sounds interesting, but personally in this case I'd rather stick to the FPP and keep isometric stuff as a world map or something like that.

Still, it would be interesting to see how it works in your case.

 

[Severian Silk]

I answer NO to the OP's question!

 

[SCO]

Whatever you do, as a indie that doesn't have millions to pour down the never ending drain that is 3d art, it's going to be rough. But still, if you're considering a 3d rpg anyway, i suppose there is no harm, if you remember to tell the artists to make sure it looks good and stylish from both ground perspective and isometric.

The '3d dimension', especially multiple levels on the same square, will make both the programing and the art challenging. It's harder to justify cheating that when it limits the maps and exploration you might want to make in the first person part. Even the Infinity Engine inspired games and engines, which didn't depend on grids avoided that like the plague, so it's likely very hard to do.

Jagged alliance 2 had it on '2 levels' and only allow players to change level; hacks and limitations of a difficult problem that is abstracting a grid from it's actual (x,y,z), or at least to a 2d projection that doesn't represent the grid that's on screen and translate back and forth.

It doesn't stop 3d games that just don't allow non-standard possibilities or movement (ie : Age of Decadence), but imagining a 'TB' Thief game is difficult for example, so your exploration will suffer.

I actually wonder if something like Valkyria Chronicles with a more versatile movement is a bettter fit (ie: first or 3rd person phase based movement and attacks with overhead maps for planning). While it doesn't solve the multilevel problem by itself (VC didn't have it IIRC) combined with some state of the art FPS pathfinding it might, and it certainly makes the UI and gameplay differences of the 'switch' lesser, by having the movement not really change between modes. It makes the 'overhead view' anemic, functionality wise, restricting it to planning and information + whatever gameplay feature you stuff there (VC had special attacks and effects there as 'orders').

 

[Raapys]

Maybe you could define lots of combat areas manually throughout the game world, and when an encounter started it would find the closest such area and move the actors there?

I think having it dynamically create a combat area on the fly, based on the immediate area, would either present a lot of potential bugs and problems, or greatly limit your area design.

 

[Deflowerer]

Cheaper way to do it would be having isometric sprites for combat and 3D dungeons like in the video above. I think it works well. Yes, I know people may dislike battles occuring on an abstracted battlefield removed from the 3d dungeon screen, but tbh if you have limited resources this is the best way to go. Of course, there should be a reason for having the isometric look in the combat system: positioning, movement, attacks/spells that have specific ranges or AoE's depending on player's position and so on.

 

[zwanzig_zwoelf]

Cheaper way to do it would be having isometric sprites for combat and 3D dungeons like in the video above. I think it works well. Yes, I know people may dislike battles occuring on an abstracted battlefield removed from the 3d dungeon screen, but tbh if you have limited resources this is the best way to go. Of course, there should be a reason for having the isometric look in the combat system: positioning, movement, attacks/spells that have specific ranges or AoE's depending on player's position and so on.

The PSP version? Seriously?

 

[DavidBVal]

Cheaper way to do it would be having isometric sprites for combat and 3D dungeons like in the video above. I think it works well. Yes, I know people may dislike battles occuring on an abstracted battlefield removed from the 3d dungeon screen, but tbh if you have limited resources this is the best way to go. Of course, there should be a reason for having the isometric look in the combat system: positioning, movement, attacks/spells that have specific ranges or AoE's depending on player's position and so on.

An abstract, generic battlefield is what Albion did. I was a bit reticent about it at first but I thoroughly enjoyed combat in Albion. It's not a bad option, but I want to make a serious attempt at using the same game map in exploration and combat. If it's impossible, then I'll consider all options including the abstract combat map. I'll begin experimenting in September and should have a clear course about the whole project by Christmas (if all goes well with my current release).

 

[V_K]

An abstract, generic battlefield is what Albion did.

Which is very funny, given that the game (as well as its predecessors Amberstar and Ambermoon) uses three different perspectives for exploration alone.

 

[Deflowerer]

The PSP version? Seriously?

I hear you, brother. I really dislike the PSP version's music, since P1'st OST is GOAT. But I prefer speeding battles up by turning off animations, so PSP is the way to go. Plus there's a fan patch that replaces new BGM with the old one, even if it's only half of the original OST. Not to mention that the English PSX version lacks Snow Queen quest.

 

[DavidBVal]

My preliminary test is done, and it is very feasible. This is definitely how it's going to be, the idea is officially APPROVED.

Don't pay much attention to framerate or assets, it's all placeholders for testing. What I wanted to try is the switch from 1st person realtime to 3rd person TB, and I love how it looks. I also wanted to try to generate a grid that adapts to terrain/obstacles. All of it works fine.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Now show me the character creation and the barbarian class.

 

[v1rus]

Fuck me, I've been wondering how would this combination work out for months. Tyvm for providing an answer, and, gl with that!

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Fuck me, I've been wondering how would this combination work out for months. Tyvm for providing an answer, and, gl with that!

Realms of Arkania, Betrayal at Krondor ring a bell?

 

[DavidBVal]

Now show me the character creation and the barbarian class.

Too early to show yet, but I think you all will enjoy the rulesystem and char creation.

There are no "classes", there are careers, meant to be switched once you have learned enough from one and have a chance to go for another. There are 20 basic careers and (for now) 15 advanced ones. If you choose to roll your stats, your initial career is also rolled although you can choose the archetype (warrior, academic, ranger etc). So you can end up rolling a beggar which later you advance into a burglar and a spy. Or a slave pit figther that becomes a wizard apprentice. Or Bounty Hunter that becomes an assassin. If you don't like randomness, you can distribute points and choose a basic career. But of course by rolling there's a few extra points to reward some patience.

However, for the next couple months I must focus on Exiled Kingdoms v 1.1, which is what pays my bills. This project (Codename Geryon) will advance slowly until then but I hope to dedicate almost full time to it from January and onwards.

 

[Naveen]

Inspired by the Warhammer RPG?

 

[DavidBVal]

Inspired by the Warhammer RPG?

Yeah, indeed. But only loosely, as the system is also based in levels.

 

[vonAchdorf]

Cool - the adaptive grid reminds me of Chaos Chronicles which had that (in isometric).

 

[gaussgunner]

Interesting. I'm attempting the same thing myself. I can only find this one Chaos Chronicles trailer video that shows it. This is the look I want, with grid cell vertices interpolated across the slope of the stairs or terrain. I don't know if it'll make the final cut. There are other complications... multiple floors; linking from one floor to the stair grid to the next floor; hiding and showing floors above you; coding AI to shoot from balconies etc.

 

[v1rus]

Fuck me, I've been wondering how would this combination work out for months. Tyvm for providing an answer, and, gl with that!

Realms of Arkania, Betrayal at Krondor ring a bell?

 

[DavidBVal]

I don't know if it'll make the final cut. There are other complications... multiple floors; linking from one floor to the stair grid to the next floor; hiding and showing floors above you; coding AI to shoot from balconies etc.

That only makes it more fun.

Yeah the camera has to hide ceilings, my example above already does that. Upper floors need to be high enough to not cause conflicts tho.

As for archer AI, it has to work outside the normal pathfinding through nodes, using pure distance between nodes after a raycast to check for obstacles.