3) No more the same pixelated nightmares that were the character graphics >_<
You want a game that looks like IE, isometrical etc? Fine, go for it, even make it with handdrawn graphics if it suits you, the graphics fidelity doesn't need to be high, just the artistic direction could make up for that.
I would like a new game, not another enhanced edition, in 5th edition rules(with multiclass please /glares angrily at the abomination of Sword Coast Legends), with a new look.
It might be just me, but if we should be satisfied with seeing IE all these 19 years, then why did we advance from Pong graphics and text adventures in the first place? ._.
Gameplay first and all, but it's been quite a few years of IE. Let it be >.>
If the new game uses the Infinity Engine, then I'm going to be wondering if Beamdog likes to shoot themselves in the foot. IE is way out of date, by 15 years at this point.
How would that work? A ten year old riding his bike to all of his neighbours houses to fix their Wi-Fi connections and other issues so they can get their online news?
How would that work? A ten year old riding his bike to all of his neighbours houses to fix their Wi-Fi connections and other issues so they can get their online news?
I personally would find it more entertaining when he showed up to houses to deliver the paper and the home owners sent him packing.
"Why would we want the newspaper?!" "I have Wi-Fi, thanks!" *door slams*
We also need an "immunity to .eff" opcode (like opcode 206, but blocks .eff files instead of .spl files.
Doesn't that work if you fill in the source field of the .eff struct?
I don't know what several of those terms mean. (I'm on a Mac, so I use Near Infinity... I know there are some terminology differences between NI and DLTCEP)
Do you mean, I can put the name of an .eff file into the 'Resource' field of the 206 effect, and (assuming there is not a .spl file with the same name) it will work??
If so that would amazeballs. But, I think that's not what you mean. I think you're talking about adding some data to the .eff file itself? I'm not sure how that would work.
What he means is that if you fill 8byte field 0x94 on the .eff file with the name of the .spl you're blocking with 206, the .eff will get blocked as well.
There is no manual for these kind of things, is there?
The closest thing to one are the IESDP and the WeiDU documentation. On other topics inside IE modding (NPCs, dialogue creation and kits) you can find actually pretty good tutorials.
3) No more the same pixelated nightmares that were the character graphics >_<
You want a game that looks like IE, isometrical etc? Fine, go for it, even make it with handdrawn graphics if it suits you, the graphics fidelity doesn't need to be high, just the artistic direction could make up for that.
I would like a new game, not another enhanced edition, in 5th edition rules(with multiclass please /glares angrily at the abomination of Sword Coast Legends), with a new look.
It might be just me, but if we should be satisfied with seeing IE all these 19 years, then why did we advance from Pong graphics and text adventures in the first place? ._.
Gameplay first and all, but it's been quite a few years of IE. Let it be >.>
If the new game uses the Infinity Engine, then I'm going to be wondering if Beamdog likes to shoot themselves in the foot. IE is way out of date, by 15 years at this point.
[...] I hope it's gonna have its own executable and folders.
Didn't like the way SoD forced itself upon bg1 on steam
That was 100% Valve's fault, because Valve insists that expansions be tied to the base game that way on Steam.
I 90% sure this was WotC's fault (not Valve's), they have a standing policy that any new stand alone game must use the latest D&D edition. So the only way to make SoD with 2e rules was to make it a DLC instead of a stand alone game.
I 90% sure this was WotC's fault (not Valve's), they have a standing policy that any new stand alone game must use the latest D&D edition. So the only way to make SoD with 2e rules was to make it a DLC instead of a stand alone game.
That's not what I was referring to. I was referring to the way Steam handles expansions. There's a few ways to do expansions. Beamdog has used two of them. 1) The expansion has its own folder structure, which contains links to the original game. 2) The expansion is contained within the folder structure of the original game.
I have read in another thread Bemadog was working on a new project that it is now in beta. Do we know something of it? Lately info on Beamdog projects seems to be scarce.
I have read in another thread Bemadog was working on a new project that it is now in beta. Do we know something of it? Lately info on Beamdog projects seems to be scarce.
I used to be firmly in the camp of sticking with the Infinity Engine for future titles. I felt that this was the only mode of properly delivering the epic fantasy that BG, IWD, and PS:T conveyed. But, after playing through Obsidian's games (specifically, Pillars of Eternity), I can see that these games can definitely be made in a modern engine while still retaining the charm of their predecessors. So, yes, I'm all on board with the idea of Beamdog innovating on the model and leveraging the latest and greatest to deliver a terrific experience. The Infinity Engine will always hold a place in my nostalgic heart, but if Beamdog wanted to explore with other modes of delivering their game, that's a fine call.
The Infinity Engine will always hold a place in my nostalgic heart, but if Beamdog wanted to explore with other modes of delivering their game, that's a fine call.
I honestly think that using the Infinity Engine for future games would only hold Beamdog back at this point...
The biggest issue for me in new game engines is not losing basic features. Often multiplayer or moddability is sacrificed. Those are 2 major dints against Pillars of Eternity.
The biggest issue for me in new game engines is not losing basic features. Often multiplayer or moddability is sacrificed. Those are 2 major dints against Pillars of Eternity.
I suspect this new game is simply Torment EE. If it were a new D&D game that used 5e and in the style of the IE games I wouldn't complain....so long as they don't follow nSpace and their disastrously awful Sword Coast Legends flop as their example.
If it were a new D&D game that used 5e and in the style of the IE games I wouldn't complain....so long as they don't follow nSpace and their disastrously awful Sword Coast Legends flop as their example.
I honestly still don't know what came over n-Space to spend money on a D&D licence only to not use it at all. I mean, yes, they used the names, but they could have easily replaced them with any generic fantasy names, as they didn't use the lore in any meaningful way (their 'campaign' could've taken place in any generic fantasy world as it was not tied to the Forgotten realms lore at all), and they didn't implement the D&D rules (neither 2nd, 3rd, or 5th edition). I'm still dumbfounded as to why n-Space could have possibly thought that throwing money down the drain (if buying a D&D licence only to not use it isn't throwing money down the drain, I don't know what is) is a good idea...
On the plus side, and seeing how well that worked out for n-Space, it's quite a safe bet that Beamdog won't follow their example...
If it were a new D&D game that used 5e and in the style of the IE games I wouldn't complain....so long as they don't follow nSpace and their disastrously awful Sword Coast Legends flop as their example.
I honestly still don't know what came over n-Space to spend money on a D&D licence only to not use it at all. I mean, yes, they used the names, but they could have easily replaced them with any generic fantasy names, as they didn't use the lore in any meaningful way (their 'campaign' could've taken place in any generic fantasy world as it was not tied to the Forgotten realms lore at all), and they didn't implement the D&D rules (neither 2nd, 3rd, or 5th edition). I'm still dumbfounded as to why n-Space could have possibly thought that throwing money down the drain (if buying a D&D licence only to not use it isn't throwing money down the drain, I don't know what is) is a good idea...
On the plus side, and seeing how well that worked out for n-Space, it's quite a safe bet that Beamdog won't follow their example...
Not connected? It has major tie-ins to both the Time of Troubles and the 5th edition Rage of Demons. I'll concede the campaign wasn't the greatest, but it was definitely connected.
If it were a new D&D game that used 5e and in the style of the IE games I wouldn't complain....so long as they don't follow nSpace and their disastrously awful Sword Coast Legends flop as their example.
I honestly still don't know what came over n-Space to spend money on a D&D licence only to not use it at all. I mean, yes, they used the names, but they could have easily replaced them with any generic fantasy names, as they didn't use the lore in any meaningful way (their 'campaign' could've taken place in any generic fantasy world as it was not tied to the Forgotten realms lore at all), and they didn't implement the D&D rules (neither 2nd, 3rd, or 5th edition). I'm still dumbfounded as to why n-Space could have possibly thought that throwing money down the drain (if buying a D&D licence only to not use it isn't throwing money down the drain, I don't know what is) is a good idea...
On the plus side, and seeing how well that worked out for n-Space, it's quite a safe bet that Beamdog won't follow their example...
Someone didn't read the lore very well...
The problem with SCL wasn't the campaign; it was the fact that they didn't follow the D&D 5th Edition ruleset at all. Creating your own ruleset and making it function like an ARPG is NOT what users wanted or expected out of a game which had the D&D logo splattered over it.
Comments
1) No more 2nd edition.
2) No more IE.
3) No more the same pixelated nightmares that were the character graphics >_<
You want a game that looks like IE, isometrical etc? Fine, go for it, even make it with handdrawn graphics if it suits you, the graphics fidelity doesn't need to be high, just the artistic direction could make up for that.
I would like a new game, not another enhanced edition, in 5th edition rules(with multiclass please /glares angrily at the abomination of Sword Coast Legends), with a new look.
It might be just me, but if we should be satisfied with seeing IE all these 19 years, then why did we advance from Pong graphics and text adventures in the first place? ._.
Gameplay first and all, but it's been quite a few years of IE. Let it be >.>
Didn't like the way SoD forced itself upon bg1 on steam
"Why would we want the newspaper?!"
"I have Wi-Fi, thanks!"
*door slams*
1) The expansion has its own folder structure, which contains links to the original game.
2) The expansion is contained within the folder structure of the original game.
Steam requires that developers use #2.
On the plus side, and seeing how well that worked out for n-Space, it's quite a safe bet that Beamdog won't follow their example...
The problem with SCL wasn't the campaign; it was the fact that they didn't follow the D&D 5th Edition ruleset at all. Creating your own ruleset and making it function like an ARPG is NOT what users wanted or expected out of a game which had the D&D logo splattered over it.
Two days ago you said that it would be revealed soon......
http://wowwiki.wikia.com/wiki/Soon
Now ←-------------- Very Soon -------- Soon -------- Soon-ish --------→ End of Time