(I can't vouch for the game though; I never played it.)

Moderator: Bard Hall Bouncers
Only two are unspeakable for me (R1 was decent).
The true power of "crowdsourcing"... You can spend the money on anything you want, unlike publisher funding. Get 1.5M to "finish" ToN, and make Occulus exclusive VR game (which in turn is also funded by Occulus), then spend that money + use assets of said game on BT4.
It's not a real drawback though, since the "crowd" can't legally hold you accountable and won't cut your funding if you don't show any progress and keep silent. That "drawback" is easily circumvented by simply ignoring the "crowd" (eg. your fans). At least for a while...
The other was T:ToN.
Legally, no, but if you just drop the ball and walk away, they won't back you again.ZiN wrote: ↑January 31st, 2018, 2:30 amIt's not a real drawback though, since the "crowd" can't legally hold you accountable and won't cut your funding if you don't show any progress and keep silent. That "drawback" is easily circumvented by simply ignoring the "crowd" (eg. your fans). At least for a while...
Besides BT4, the others are WL3 (also InXile - I enjoyed WL2:DC), Phoenix Point (Snapshot Games - they've got Julian Gollop on board), and Pathfinder:Kingmaker (Owlcat Games). I'd probably come up with another one or two if pressed, but there isn't a lot.
Perhaps. But even if that was the case, the community would call for their heads, if they delivered a game looking like one made by a single guy. Everyone expects something a lot better than that and here we are again with something that isn't easy.
Indeed it is, and so did Wasteland 2; which turned out to be a great game, but one far, far removed from what I'd have wanted, or expected as an official Wasteland sequel.SuperDave17 wrote: ↑February 2nd, 2018, 12:03 amThis particular series is trying to leapfrog and somehow please two very different sets of expectations.
But you've played Bard's Tale (1, 2, or 3)...yes?
I didn't think so. It's a conceptual compromise. I would prefer it closer to BT2 or BT3, but that's just not going to happen. The above concept pulls back from FPP view to show the entire scene play out. Where the player could click on what group the PC targets, and see the PCs make their attacks. Realms of Arkania did loosely similar... though without the transition; it just switched to its isometric TB combat system
I just looked at the official screenshot, and used that as my next modeling subject. It's about learning Blender; to be able to make anything that comes to mind.Also you have too much free time Gizmo
It's not a "comprimise" though, it's creating a JRPG or RoA-like rather than a FPP blobber. Either way it's a pointless discussion as we already know what the game is going to look like from the combat video.
While distance in BT2/3 is abstract, when I look at BT 1-3 today, combat reminds me more of Might & Magic or Wizardry, first-person. I'm sure if the BT series didn't "end" at 3 and kept being made into the 90's, it would have naturally evolved into an M&M or Wizardry style game, rather than an overhead tactical RPG. I'm sure if you had a complete layman play BT 1-3, they would conclude that combat is first-person. You seem to be clutching at straws because you personally prefer RoA/Gold Box style RPGs.
Combat in RoA or Gold Box isn't abstract though, it's an overhead tactical map, it's quite literal.(...just as Realms of Arkania, and most of the Gold Box SSI titles do.)
Clutching at straws?
Of course it is abstract; all turn-based, grid-mapped, combat mini-games are abstractions.Combat in RoA or Gold Box isn't abstract though, it's an overhead tactical map, it's quite literal.
I had gotten the impression that the label JRPGs was a generalization used to convey an overall commonality of premise to the mechanics; popularly seen in (enough) Japanese RPGs, for the name to stick.The whole genre of JRPG are nonsensical. It describes games that come out of Japan, they are as varied as any other CRPG so the whole comparison makes no real sense. I mean i get you mean anime and stuff but yeah, thats as much as a needless generalisation as any.
This was my understanding as well.Gizmo wrote: ↑February 12th, 2018, 9:17 amI did not see it as meaning Japanese (roleplaying) games, per se... just the perceived style of them. (IE. Similar to how a meaning is conveyed from the term Rogue-like... when applied to graphical (and even fully 3D) titles. "Rouge-like" tells you the gist of the gameplay.)
Extra Credits has a couple videos on Western vs. Japanese RPGs and why they have the differences they do.Lord of Riva wrote: ↑February 12th, 2018, 1:58 amThe whole genre of JRPG are nonsensical. It describes games that come out of Japan, they are as varied as any other CRPG so the whole comparison makes no real sense.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests