The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Announcements & media coverage pertaining to Bard's Tale IV. Only moderators & inXile can make new threads on this forum.

Moderator: Bard Hall Bouncers

User avatar
thebruce
Forum Moderator
Posts: 897
Joined: February 17th, 2015, 8:46 am
Contact:

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by thebruce » May 15th, 2017, 7:18 pm

Woolfe wrote:
May 15th, 2017, 3:28 pm
thebruce wrote:
May 15th, 2017, 12:48 pm
If there's ambient inter-character chatter, there should be an option to disable it as it's not pertinent to gameplay. It may be great for esthetic, for those who like it, but especially if it's audio, please let us disable it.
Yup and talking about "immersion" some of us find it immersion breaking when our characters that we created suddenly have a personality that we didn't.
Exactly this. For some, banter may help build 'ambiance'. For others (many of us wish for more BT classic in BT4), banter takes us out of immersion.

demeisen wrote:
May 15th, 2017, 4:00 pm
I think the best option was the one they had to discard for budgetary reasons: have the characters be first class environment members. The next best, to my way of looking at it, is for them to have no pretense whatsoever of environment containment.
Yep, this was a concern from the beginning. Having them entirely in-environment would not be very BT-like. But having them entirely out of environment many people apparently felt was too "old school". But having them half-and-half makes them sit in some weird limbo where they're neither here nor there and have to do weird acrobatics depending on the context of their current actions.

Honestly I've always felt that they should be in-UI - and that doesn't mean it has to be 'ugly' or low quality. It's just how the portraits are presented. I'll mentioned Hearthstone again; characters are presented as card portraits, they never have a reason to face backwards when attacking, you just instinctively know their position and order, and their portrait is an artistic abstraction of their live "space". The presentation owns its style. Half-and-half is like the UI doesn't know whether the characters should be in-space or in-UI, and it can be jarring.
I hope inXile finds a good way smoothen out that party display... /:) (without losing the Bard's Tale feel)
Visit BardsTaleOnline.com - your community Bard's Tale classic RPG resource!
Twitter: @BardsTaleOnline / Facebook: Bards.Tale.Online
@thebruce0

demeisen
Acolyte
Posts: 98
Joined: July 11th, 2015, 9:59 am

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by demeisen » May 16th, 2017, 8:11 am

thebruce wrote:
May 15th, 2017, 7:18 pm
Honestly I've always felt that they should be in-UI
+1. Feels like the best choice to me as well. One issue I could see is that the GUI should still capture the 2D positions of your characters, since that is something that matters to gameplay. E.g, you'd still want to know which of your characters was "in front of" which monster on the battle grid. They'd have to address that sort of environment/GUI boundary issue, but I would think it's a solvable problem.

My next best choice after pure-UI would be turn them around so they walk forwards and face the creatures they're engaged in combat with, so it doesn't look like they're swinging swords behind their backs. Anyway it doesn't seem so smart to turn your back on nasty monsters trying to kill you, even if you are good at behind-the-back melee :lol: Between the two though, I think I'd prefer pure-UI.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2933
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by Gizmo » May 16th, 2017, 11:13 am

demeisen wrote:
May 15th, 2017, 4:00 pm
I think the main objection to the current scheme is that the characters appear to explore by moving backwards.
Indeed. That was my first thought when seeing the screen images; and it was disconcerting. :shock:
___

Has anyone considered Stonekeep's character UI?
( Stonekeep 's UI was a mirror. 8-) )
Image

secretfire
Initiate
Posts: 17
Joined: March 15th, 2012, 7:01 pm

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by secretfire » May 16th, 2017, 2:30 pm

Ok, so I acknowledge again that, as long as I have story, I'm an easily pleased gamer. That being said...

ugh, take them out and put them in the UI, gods, thats ugly. You could have the best artist in the world and a hundred million dollar budget, it would STILL be ugly. And for what? To have people facing you to the SIDE, eating up screen real estate, rather then an unobtrusive placement in the bottom with a minimal UI?

I would want to see a statistically significant number of gamers polled (more then just us few right here) who said they'd be willing to buy that before I'd believe it would sell more then like, 2 copies. Sure, all of the games had it 20+ years ago, but thats just repulsive today. Even I have my limits.

Perhaps what they should do is a compromise. If they are animating all of these monsters, even if they've gotten away from the Isometric stuff... how hard would it be to animate some 'people' in the same fashion they've animated the monsters in the combat example?

So what I mean is this:

OLD: OVERHEAD EXPENSIVE ISOMETRIC
CURRENT: PSUEDO-3D FROM A 2-D PERSPECTIVE, ALL ENEMIES WITH CUTE ANIMATIONS AND 2-D VERSIONS OF YOUR PEOPLE

PROPOSED: As per current, except there would be psuedo-3d versions of your characters placed on the screen. It would have to be cheaper then doing the isometric, probably more expensive then animating a single enemy, but not that much more expensive then what they are doing to animate a single enemy now. Might still be more money then they'd have though.

Honestly, I don't even care if the game never gets released. I don't back InExile because I want to play the games; its a risk. I back them with the idea that they'll do their best to create a certain sort of videogame. If they ended up with a 35% failure rate, I'd probably still back them. I am so -totally- in the minority here, its not even funny. I mean, I wouldn't do that for every company. I didn't back Harebrained Schemes as I didn't think the plans they showed in their original video matched the sort of feel I was going for when I back a project. But I realize my backing isn't a pre-order, its basically an artistic donation.

God, I hope they can find a way to do this that makes people happy. I want them to make tons of money. I can't possibly see how it can work out though, too many conflicting ideas.

demeisen
Acolyte
Posts: 98
Joined: July 11th, 2015, 9:59 am

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by demeisen » May 16th, 2017, 2:55 pm

secretfire wrote:
May 16th, 2017, 2:30 pm
I would want to see a statistically significant number of gamers polled (more then just us few right here) who said they'd be willing to buy that before I'd believe it would sell more then like, 2 copies.
Well, Grimrock 1 and 2 used ui-embedded character portraits. I think LoG 1 sold over a million copies.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2933
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by Gizmo » May 16th, 2017, 3:59 pm

secretfire wrote:
May 16th, 2017, 2:30 pm
ugh, take them out and put them in the UI, gods, thats ugly. You could have the best artist in the world and a hundred million dollar budget, it would STILL be ugly. And for what? To have people facing you to the SIDE, eating up screen real estate, rather then an unobtrusive placement in the bottom with a minimal UI?
Is this a response to InXile's screenshots, or to a particular post?
It would have to be cheaper then doing the isometric, probably more expensive then animating a single enemy, but not that much more expensive then what they are doing to animate a single enemy now. Might still be more money then they'd have though.
I don't think so. Almost any modern iso-style game would be done via 3D. Technically even Fallout 1 & 2 were done via 3D. I'd have to think that a fixed isometric (3D) would be cheaper than 360° FPP view any day; because in full FPP, the player can view the world from any angle; and the textures (and models) have to pass muster at close scrutiny. Games like Nocturne (for instance) could get away with maps that almost look like movie back-lots; with partial sets... because the camera will never show the other —sometimes non-existent side.

Image

User avatar
Zombra
Global Moderator
Posts: 5727
Joined: March 8th, 2012, 10:50 pm

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by Zombra » May 16th, 2017, 4:15 pm

On an unrelated subject ... it's one of my greatest disappointments in the gaming world that Nocturne never got a proper sequel :cry:
Image

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2933
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by Gizmo » May 16th, 2017, 4:49 pm

Zombra wrote:
May 16th, 2017, 4:15 pm
On an unrelated subject ... it's one of my greatest disappointments in the gaming world that Nocturne never got a proper sequel :cry:
That would be a game for CDProjekt. :twisted:
demeisen wrote:
May 15th, 2017, 4:00 pm
I'm thinking something a bit Grimrocky, with no environmental containment illusion, except maybe below instead of to the side so it's easier to visualize the geometry.
To use Grimrock as an example of concept... I would have preferred no GUI (or cursor-only gui) for exploration mode in hud-less Grimrock style FPP, but when an encounter occurred, to have the perspective shift into ISO/3D (almost like Gold-Box), but for BT-style phased based combat; with a fully animated party that executes their given actions... and unlike RT/wP have them all NOT under player control after the phase has begun, and their intended actions given.

*Pardon the quick demo. :mrgreen:
Of course I do mean this only as a base illustration of concept... not as a finished (professional) example ~and not to be taken literally —as-is.
Image

Character screens (perhaps full-screen stat sheets with portraits) could have existed, but needn't have been part the main hud; and could have seriously taken a page from the Disciples series.

Image

demeisen
Acolyte
Posts: 98
Joined: July 11th, 2015, 9:59 am

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by demeisen » May 18th, 2017, 8:49 am

Gizmo wrote:
May 16th, 2017, 4:49 pm
I would have preferred no GUI (or cursor-only gui) for exploration mode in hud-less Grimrock style FPP, but when an encounter occurred, to have the perspective shift into ISO/3D (almost like Gold-Box), but for BT-style phased based combat; with a fully animated party that executes their given actions... and unlike RT/wP have them all NOT under player control after the phase has begun, and their intended actions given.
Agreed, that would have been ideal. Unfortunately, it sounds like we (collectively) didn't get them enough funding for that. :cry:

(If I was independently wealthy I'd have tossed in whatever they needed).

User avatar
thebruce
Forum Moderator
Posts: 897
Joined: February 17th, 2015, 8:46 am
Contact:

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by thebruce » May 18th, 2017, 10:33 am

I still see any move towards in-environment depiction of actions as a step away from the abstracted gameplay/space style (which has nothing to do with technological capability) that is the basic structure of BT navigation and combat... and note I said in-environment, not in-engine or what have you. The combination of literal depiction of actions tied with a literal interpretation of the environment. In BT1-3 those were separated which opened the door to a wider variety of structures and events since literal interpretation wouldn't have to accomodate the relatively vast possibilities that a human imagination can conjur, rather than being limited to what could feasibly be created in the same literal environmental display.

But heck, if the characters can all be displayed and combat can be fun, and we could theoretically face 99x99x99x99 bersekers in a single combat, then I wouldn't have as much of a problem with it :P
Visit BardsTaleOnline.com - your community Bard's Tale classic RPG resource!
Twitter: @BardsTaleOnline / Facebook: Bards.Tale.Online
@thebruce0

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2933
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by Gizmo » May 18th, 2017, 1:35 pm

thebruce wrote:
May 18th, 2017, 10:33 am
I still see any move towards in-environment depiction of actions as a step away from the abstracted gameplay/space style (which has nothing to do with technological capability) that is the basic structure of BT navigation and combat... and note I said in-environment, not in-engine or what have you. The combination of literal depiction of actions tied with a literal interpretation of the environment. In BT1-3 those were separated which opened the door to a wider variety of structures and events since literal interpretation wouldn't have to accomodate the relatively vast possibilities that a human imagination can conjur, rather than being limited to what could feasibly be created in the same literal environmental display.
BT did a great job giving text descriptions of the events playing out; So did Wasteland, and so did Fallout. Fallout —additionally, did a superb job showing them play out.
Image

Fallout was essentially an upgraded Wasteland-unofficial-sequel/spin-off that did in some ways seem to extrapolate improvements on the original.
Image

And I wouldn't mind seeing a BT sequel done in the same vein.

User avatar
paultakeda
Forum Moderator
Posts: 2691
Joined: March 14th, 2012, 2:47 pm
Location: AAAAAARGH!

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by paultakeda » May 19th, 2017, 8:36 am

Fallout was a spiritual successor, not a sequel.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2933
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by Gizmo » May 19th, 2017, 3:34 pm

paultakeda wrote:
May 19th, 2017, 8:36 am
Fallout was a spiritual successor, not a sequel.
Yes we know this; but it was because they could not get the Wasteland license. That's what 'essentially an upgraded Wasteland-unofficial-sequel/spin-off' sort of means.

Arx Fatalis is a spiritual successor to Ultima Underworld —unlicensed. It even has an undocumented rune spell that degrades the graphics to look give the game a faked —further primitive look to the graphics. :lol:

secretfire
Initiate
Posts: 17
Joined: March 15th, 2012, 7:01 pm

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by secretfire » May 25th, 2017, 1:00 am

It was in response to this: http://www.grimrock.net/wp-content/uplo ... 4-7_04.png (which was posted a few pages back)

I think InExiles basic user interface is fine, tbh. I watched it at home and those with me (not gamers) thought it looked gorgeous. I mean, I enjoyed the (above user example) interface back upon a time, I just think these days its clunky. I don't see why anyone would prefer it to the elegant one InExile seems to have made. But I --am-- worried that no matter what they do, people will not be happy. It seems like, because of Mass Effect, Witcher 3 and Fallout 4, action games are 'in' and the sort of experimental/rpg games InExile and Obsidian make are not in vogue right now. I think thats why Wasteland 2 sold well. Had they ACTUALLY come out with WL2 6-8 years ago, I don't think it would have done nearly as well. I think the Torment: Tides of Numenera and WL2 sales would have been reversed. Then again, it could be all the big games that came out when Tides came out.

But for Bards Tale 4, I'm still worried about them making everyone happy. It seems impossible. Its a rough spot to be in.

User avatar
Crosmando
Supreme Jerk
Posts: 5012
Joined: January 3rd, 2013, 8:48 am

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by Crosmando » May 25th, 2017, 7:25 am

Gizmo wrote:
May 19th, 2017, 3:34 pm
paultakeda wrote:
May 19th, 2017, 8:36 am
Fallout was a spiritual successor, not a sequel.
Yes we know this; but it was because they could not get the Wasteland license. That's what 'essentially an upgraded Wasteland-unofficial-sequel/spin-off' sort of means.
7 characters to 1, sounds like a downgrade to me.
Matthias did nothing wrong!

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2933
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by Gizmo » May 25th, 2017, 9:52 am

Crosmando wrote:
May 25th, 2017, 7:25 am
7 characters to 1, sounds like a downgrade to me.
Party members? I think you can have up to five party members in Fallout—if the leader is charismatic enough to handle that many.
It might be possible to get more through an exploit... I don't recall. I know you can in FO3.

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8788
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by Drool » May 25th, 2017, 12:21 pm

Gizmo wrote:
May 25th, 2017, 9:52 am
Crosmando wrote:
May 25th, 2017, 7:25 am
7 characters to 1, sounds like a downgrade to me.
Party members? I think you can have up to five party members in Fallout—if the leader is charismatic enough to handle that many.
It might be possible to get more through an exploit... I don't recall. I know you can in FO3.
Not at once.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

I neither work, nor speak, for inXile.

Not too late; make it eight!

User avatar
Crosmando
Supreme Jerk
Posts: 5012
Joined: January 3rd, 2013, 8:48 am

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by Crosmando » May 25th, 2017, 1:37 pm

You know what I mean - those are just followers.
Matthias did nothing wrong!

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 2933
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: The Bard's Tale IV Update 35: Combat Commentary & Brian DiDomenico Joins the Team

Post by Gizmo » May 25th, 2017, 8:20 pm

Drool wrote:
May 25th, 2017, 12:21 pm
I know you can in FO3.
Not at once.
There is a way: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnCftBAY52E
Crosmando wrote:
May 25th, 2017, 1:37 pm
You know what I mean - those are just followers.
But if you know your followers well, you can plan around them, and not really need to control them; but in FO2, you can push them around if need be, and it does use their APs. I've certainly used it to move them out of my PC's line of fire, and to move them from behind my PC (in their line of fire).

Image

There is a user mod/patch that includes a config option to give the player control of the followers in Fallout 2. I've never used it, but I saw it in the options.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest