charlequin
Banned
Yeah, good point. Similarly, 3D would be a lot more flexible -- less need to lock stuff like exact proportions and viewpoints down early on, which means more room to create assets in parallel to engine development/writing/etc.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Avellone is "down" to kickstarting an old school RPG (possibly PS:T 2)
- Thread starter dude
- Start date
Yeah, good point. Similarly, 3D would be a lot more flexible -- less need to lock stuff like exact proportions and viewpoints down early on, which means more room to create assets in parallel to engine development/writing/etc.
Ehhh, depends on the team. If you take that approach, suddenly properly planning everything seems less important, and that inevitably comes back to bite you in the ass. In my experience, the strongest executions come from meticulously planning everything before you start development in earnest. Having that time, though, is quite the luxury.
charlequin
Banned
Well, it's not so much a "don't plan shit" thing as a "no plan survives contact with the enemy" thing -- when stuff changes late in development (as it is wont to do), 3D assets are more flexible.
I guess I've just seen way too many projects start down this road and end up as "don't plan shit".
This 2d vs. 3D thing is moot. If they end up using something that looks like ToEE you won't see me complaining. Held up pretty much as well as BG.
They should just do whatever is needed to save money. This project shouldn't be about stuff like triple-A graphics or excessive voice over.
They should just do whatever is needed to save money. This project shouldn't be about stuff like triple-A graphics or excessive voice over.
Sentenza
Member
Well, but that's pretty much the point. When you have a limited budget the least clever thing you should attempt, about graphics, is to compete with triple A productions on the quality of assets, textures, details... Unless you have some *very* talented artist.This 2d vs. 3D thing is moot. If they end up using something that looks like ToEE you won't see me complaining. Held up pretty much as well as BG.
They should just do whatever is needed to save money. This project shouldn't be about stuff like triple-A graphics or excessive voice over.
Going for a stylized approach (where "stylized" in the end can translate in a very broad range of solutions) is a smart thing because it allows your product to look nice without being exceedingly expensive.
Personally I'm quite fond of Another World's art style cause it's the very proof of something I always believed: if you have amazing animations, graphics can even afford to just "stay out of the way" and everything will be fine in any case.
In fact, Another World's graphics offer one of these situations where adding details to these models would probably do more harm than good.
Another example of extremely stylized (and very cost-effective) graphics I like very much:
I can generally agree about 2D and 3D being able to reach the same excellence if properly handled.
Another example of extremely stylized (and very cost-effective) graphics I like very much:
Talking about Darklands, I heard a 3D remake was being planned?
I'd really much prefer a faithful 2D update, though admittedly I need to play the original properly first.
I also like te Another World aproach... I even used it for a game I made a while back...
RPGs, in general, I think, should leave a little to the imagination, and 2d graphics are usually perfect for this. But, 2D graphics are not always the best, and when you want to overcome some of their limitation they can be very time consuming (for example, trying to create a scene with a very specific lighting or changing source of light etc.) I think low-poly 3D models are the best way to go, they're relatively easy and cheap to do.
RPGs, in general, I think, should leave a little to the imagination, and 2d graphics are usually perfect for this. But, 2D graphics are not always the best, and when you want to overcome some of their limitation they can be very time consuming (for example, trying to create a scene with a very specific lighting or changing source of light etc.) I think low-poly 3D models are the best way to go, they're relatively easy and cheap to do.
Sentenza
Member
No idea. Over the years I heard tons of painful rumors about remakes but as far as I know not even one actually started.
Also, it doesn't help that no one apparently knows who exactly owns the rights of the game, so there's apparently no way to "liberalize" the source code.
Not sure if that's actually the case (as someone claimed the last time I read about it, a couple of years ago) or if those who could do it just don't want to (for some strange reason, being the franchise virtually devoid of any commercial appeal to a modern audience).
Joseph Merrick
Member
atari is the publisher for it on gog
Felix Lighter
Member
Is it possible to emulate the D&D rule set without the license? I'm just curious. I'd imagine coming up with a new, deep and balanced rule set would be a major effort.
The Mana Legend
Banned
Can I have Planescape on Steam, please? I've never played it and desperately want to.
The Mana Legend
Banned
Can't, my bank blocks all transactions from the country GOG is from.
I think part of the d20 system is freely available, at least for making supplements to D&D books. I don't know if that's the case for computer games, but I doubt it.
Can't you still make a payment through PayPal?
Knights of the Chalice (awesome indie party-based turn-based RPG, btw) uses Open Game Licence 3.5, so it actually a lot of similarities to DnD without being a DnD game (grappling, bullrush, 5-foot steps, etc).
Felix Lighter
Member
That was going to be my next quest: is there an open source rule set? That's pretty cool.
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
Pathfinder is just sitting there, all ripe and nubile. Waiting for some virile young developer to christen its video game maidenhead.
Superhero League of Hoboken had a Robomop playable chararacter so it's already been done to some degree:
http://www.mobygames.com/game/dos/superhero-league-of-hoboken/screenshots/gameShotId,432390/
As a very big fan of Mr. Avellone, I'd be more than happy to donate quite a bit. Always up for an Avellone RPG.
And maybe I'm crazy, but I'd almost prefer something totally new as opposed to a sequel (not that a sequel to Planescape wouldn't be amazing). Just go wild creating a world and set of characters.
And maybe I'm crazy, but I'd almost prefer something totally new as opposed to a sequel (not that a sequel to Planescape wouldn't be amazing). Just go wild creating a world and set of characters.
charlequin
Banned
Almost. 99% of the D&D 3.x system was released under an open license; anyone can use that legally in any game (including a video game) as long as they attribute it. However, the rules that aren't covered include the level-up system, so you'd have to create a different character-advancement mechanism (and a few other parts) to avoid violating the license.
Dont worry. They wont get the licenses anyways. Planescape is a dead setting.
Felix Lighter
Member
Interesting. I'm glad that they have options without building something completely from scratch.
Sentenza
Member
New IPs are potentially interesting and don't require license fee.
On the other hand they require a lot of work and there's no guarantee to end up with a setting and a ruleset that are actually worth the effort.
Of course if you are lucky you can end up with Arcanum or Darklands... But on the other hand you can find yourself with something like Kingdoms of Amalur. D:
Anyway... I'm against a direct sequel for Torment, too.
P.S. I must admit that I'm not a player myself but Pathfinder could be a clever option, because they would mutually take advantage of the exposition. A Baldur's Gate/ToEE-like with Pathfinder's ruleset and setting would raise some buzz for the videogame and drive new players to the pen & paper.
I really hope they won't use Pathfinder's setting... it's so generic and boring. I have no problem with them using the ruleset though. There have been many great settings adapted to Pathfinder, they could just use one of those.
Is AD&D under open game license? Because there are some variation of it online that are actually much better than many of the later D&D edition...
wsoxfan1214
Banned
I'm liking this trend a lot.
was it obsidian who was looking at licensing IPs because it let them get straight to characterization and scenarios without creating the background world to start?
I prefer original worlds but maybe it is cheaper for them to license something less popular and hit the ground running.
I prefer original worlds but maybe it is cheaper for them to license something less popular and hit the ground running.
Sentenza
Member
Well, to be honest with fantasy settings it's a bit like with superhero comics: they are always generic and boring (or childish and ridiculous, and so on) until it comes the one which isn't, just cause it's surprisingly well written.
It's not like Torment or Mask of the betrayer were based on critically acclaimed settings before Avellone came in doing his magic.
That said, you could be right, as I don't know the first thing about Pathfinder (except knowing it exists).
What the what?
While it is true of Forgotten Realms, it is definitely not true of Planescape. Planescape is a very unique D&D setting, and that has nothing to do with Avellone whatsoever. He made a very interesting computer game campaign based on the Planescape setting, sure, but that doesn't mean it wasn't interesting or unique before he touched it. He didn't create it either.
As for Mask of the Betrayer, Avellone is not the one responsible for it either. He worked on it, but the creative lead was George Ziets. Give credit where credit is due please. Avellone is not the only person working at Obsidian, and he is hardly the origin of all good ideas there.
Sentenza
Member
Whatever. I don't really care. You got the point.
What made Torment a special game wasn't really the setting; it was the writing.
Yeah, sure, Planescape is interesting cause it's simply a meta-setting, where you can redirect your campaign and story in any way you want, and that gives a lot of creative freedom.
You could do the very same thing with a Twilight Zone-inspired setting, for instance.
While I agree with you that the world does not necessarily make the game (Baldur's Gate gained quit a bit from its pulp-fantasy world, because it made each character stand out much more.) But, the Planescape setting was critically acclaimed and was never in the "pulp fantasy" category. It's one of the few D&D settings that are actually interesting, along with Dark Sun (In 2e atleast, I didn't follow the 4e edition, but the cover art was so horrible I wanted to puke) and maybe Ravenloft.
I'd rather have a game set in a truly interesting landscape, exploring places that are actually exciting to me rather than another elven city/dwarven fortress/goblin camp I'm supposed to be impressed with for the billionth time. Fantasy is all about the unknown and mysterious, and sadly, the Tolkienesque fantasy has no more mystery or wonder left in it. So a setting can make a difference...
You should read some of the Planescape manuals. Part of the reason Torment's writing is so good is it evokes those books so heavily.
WTF am I reading. It sounds like you're bitching about something you know nothing about just to make some vague point, and now that you've proven wrong you don't really care enough to just admit that and walk away.
Planescape is a unique setting and it is critically acclaimed. The world building and flavor in Planescape's setting is what attracted Avellone to make the game in the first place. What made Torment special is good writing applied to a great setting. Planescape is not just interesting because it's a "meta-setting", it actually has worlds, lore, tons of detailed stuff created to make it a very interesting place of possibilities for any talented writer.
Stop talking out of your ass.
Sentenza
Member
I should really point that I don't care.
Fine, ok. I was dead wrong. Planescape was always praised from the start.
Let's go back to the topic and to my point, which was: the quality of the writing can make more difference than the one of the setting.
EDIT
I'm not really sure why you are so angry about it, to be honest.
It's not like there was a fight and you HAD to dive in.
We were just civilly talking about an hypothetical game. So no, I wasn't "bitching" and there was no need to come down so fiercely.
Also, what did I say so false? Isn't Planescape essentially a meta-setting? "The gateway where every universe converges" etc?
Is it not natural to be upset when someone decides to shit on something you regard well based on his ignorance and lack of understanding? I mean, that's exactly what you just did! You even admit that you don't really care and you made a unsubstantiated point carelessly without research.
Planescape is serious business.
Guys, he actually has a point though - A well written game can usually transcend its setting. It's all about using what you've got. BG2 has a very cliche fantasy setting, ruled by every D&D trope imaginable. But BG2 wraped all of those just enough to surprise you, and together with great writing that takes its characters seriously and actually make you care for them - It's an example that you can use overused tropes and cliches to your advantage. You don't need Planescape, Dark Sun, Ravenloft, Spelljammer, World of Darkness or any other of the more original settings to make a good story or game, and having your game take place in one of them doesn't necessarily mean it'll be a good game.
alexandros
Banned
I'd love for the kickstarted game to be in 2D. In my opinion, good 2D is absolutely gorgeous and it holds up much better in time compared to 3D. Many early 3D-based games of the late 90s are almost unplayable now.
No one is disputing that point. The offense is in how he disregards Planescape as a setting!
D&D somehow manages to absorb and utilize some of the finest most imaginative fantasy writers out there, who often create amazingly cool settings and concepts, few of which are ever realized in video game form (_especially_ right now, with fucking atari shitting all over the license).
Of course it also attracts lots of really creepy people and writers, but that's also true about video games, so hey.
Now where's my fucking Dark Sun video game. It's been 18 years since the last pc games (which were Baldur's Gate before Baldur's Gate. Damn kids. Get off my lawn.)
Sentenza
Member
My original claim was just that you don't need a critically acclaimed setting to build a likable story. Then i made the mistake to list Planescape in that sentence.Is it not natural to be upset when someone decides to shit on something you regard well based on his ignorance and lack of understanding? I mean, that's exactly what you just did! You even admit that you don't really care and you made a unsubstantiated point carelessly without research.
Planescape is serious business.
When Outraged GAF pointed how it actually was "critically acclaimed" and I replied "Whatever, I don't care, you got the point anyway", I actually meant it.
It wasn't a way to claim I was right. It was just a way to say "Fine, apparently I was wrong with that, let's move on".
I wasn't disregarding or downplaying any virtue of Planescape as setting in any way, just saying that in my opinion it wasn't specifically the setting that made great Torment as a game.
Also, of course PS has its own stuff, but that doesn't change its nature of being essentially a meta-setting. What defines Sigil as a place and Planescape as a setting is being some sort of "multiverse crossroad".
I can't believe there have been more games taking in place in goddamn Mystara than Dark Sun. This is just wrong.
I'd settle for a remake of the two Dark Sun games - while I really like them, they're nearly unplayable now (the interface really didn't age well
).Being a multiverse crossroad is part of what makes PS great. Its mythology and culture make it one of the most interesting universe ever. It being a "meta-setting" never hurt the lore, or it significance. No outrage here, I just don't see where you're going with this.
God, I can't post in this thread. It will consume me.
Sentenza
Member
Uh, actually I wasn't really going anywhere with that point (which wasn't even may main point, by the way; just something I stated almost incidentally).
I was just stating what you just did: that being a meta-setting is exactly what made the Planescape universe so interesting, cause of the creative freedom it allowed.
Then again, I don't have a strong knowledge of it. I mostly judge it from what I've seen in Torment and what I've read here and there over time, but when i think about Planescape my first though isn't "Woah, it's so cool cause there's the Lady of Pain, and this weird city, and those specific planes with these weird things!" and so on.
What I think is more like "It's extremely cool cause one could really use this setting to build any kind of story, and you can have these portals opening anywhere at any condition, etc".
Planescape being a "meta" setting can also limit it from a storytelling perspective. Planescape does not fit any story, the weirdness and surrealism can make it even very specific in style... Spelljammer is also a meta-setting, but to claim you can build any story with it is ridiculous.
Also I'll have to disagree, the city of Sigil and the planes are superbly designed and make for a truly wonderful setting, and just as much as whoa for me.
Sentenza
Member
I didn't say they aren't good. I'm saying that subjectively they are not the part of the setting that strikes me more.
Anyway, we should really drop this discussion about Planescape, as there's no chance in hell for this game (IF this becomes an actual project) to obtain that license once again.
More Fun To Compute
Member
A science fiction RPG setting might be interesting for them to do since it is quite rare and there are not really any decent current game series in that genre. Y'know, something like battletech, traveller or star control.