Game News Obsidian to co-develop Wasteland 2 if Kickstarter reaches $2.1mil

[skuphundaku]

How much does it cost to licence a 3d engine like Onyx ?

There's no way they can pay for models and textures anyway, so wouldn't that be overkill to borrow this engine for a 2d game ?

If I recall correctly, Brian already said that they'll use/are seriously considering using a 3D engine, so WL2 has minimal chances of having 2D Fallout/Arcanum/PS:T style of graphics. It's much more likely they'll go for something like the Van Buren/Silent Storm type of engine, which is something that Onyx is very well suited for.

 

[Cosmo]

If it's true,...


i hope it's not true.

 

[IronicNeurotic]

How much does it cost to licence a 3d engine like Onyx ?

There's no way they can pay for models and textures anyway, so wouldn't that be overkill to borrow this engine for a 2d game ?

Onyx being a 3D engine doesn't necessarily mean they can't make 2D games with it, look at South Park. Plus 3D models are cheaper to animate than hand-drawn sprites.

South Park, despite it's cartoony look, won't be truly 2D. Most likely, they'll use Onyx with cell shading. Cell shading 3D graphics doesn't make them 2D, it just makes them LOOK 2D.

It is 2D. The assets are 2D. We know that through several sources including job listings. 2D artists are working on it. The screenshots are 2D. They are using 2D assets from the show too.

The Onyx engine is surprisingly and incredible flexible (Aliens, DSIII and now South Park are VASTLY different in terms of perspective and so on). I really don't think Feargus, Chris Jones and so on wouldn't have looked at the possiblities of a isometric or 2D or whatever game for it.

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

I didn't think that was a troll...was pretty obviously joking around.

jesus I just got ninja'd by so many people.

 

[IronicNeurotic]

If I recall correctly, Brian already said that they'll use/are seriously considering using a 3D engine, so WL2 has minimal chances of having 2D Fallout/Arcanum/PS:T style of graphics.

i'm pretty sure Planescape uses converted 3D assets.

 

[Cosmo]

He meant any kind of 2D i think...

 

[hiver]

No, no...they will pay 500,000 for MCA... hello?

 

[skuphundaku]

If I recall correctly, Brian already said that they'll use/are seriously considering using a 3D engine, so WL2 has minimal chances of having 2D Fallout/Arcanum/PS:T style of graphics.

i'm pretty sure Planescape uses converted 3D assets.

Yes, and, if I recall correctly, Fallout too. But those 3D assets are converted to 2D assets for use in-game, so, from the point of view of the game/game engine, they may just as well have been hand-drawn.

 

[oldmanpaco]

Well they have gone up about 100K since this announcement.

 

[skuphundaku]

It is 2D. The assets are 2D. We know that through several sources including job listings. 2D artists are working on it. The screenshots are 2D. They are using 2D assets from the show too.

The Onyx engine is surprisingly and incredible flexible (Aliens, DSIII and now South Park are VASTLY different in terms of perspective and so on). I really don't think Feargus, Chris Jones and so on wouldn't have looked at the possiblities of a isometric or 2D or whatever game for it.

I wasn't aware there are any South Park screen shots out there or that they use pure 2D for the art. That means that Onyx is even more badass than I previously thought, which makes it even more likely it's very high on the WL2 engine alternatives list.

 

[IronicNeurotic]

It is 2D. The assets are 2D. We know that through several sources including job listings. 2D artists are working on it. The screenshots are 2D. They are using 2D assets from the show too.

The Onyx engine is surprisingly and incredible flexible (Aliens, DSIII and now South Park are VASTLY different in terms of perspective and so on). I really don't think Feargus, Chris Jones and so on wouldn't have looked at the possiblities of a isometric or 2D or whatever game for it.

I wasn't aware there are any South Park screen shots out there or that they use pure 2D for the art. That means that Onyx is even more badass than I previously thought, which makes it even more likely it's very high on the WL2 engine alternatives list.

It looks literary just like the show. Of course its not a 2D perspective like Fallout and so on but still.

 

[Brother None]

If I recall correctly, Brian already said that they'll use/are seriously considering using a 3D engine, so WL2 has minimal chances of having 2D Fallout/Arcanum/PS:T style of graphics. It's much more likely they'll go for something like the Van Buren/Silent Storm type of engine, which is something that Onyx is very well suited for.

Yeah, it'll be a 3D engine.

Onyx? I still can't say, but I kind of doubt it. inXile is doing all the programming, they need an engine they're familiar with or that is well-documented.
But the license cost of the engine was already in the base budget of $1M, so it's got nothing to do with the $2.1M, regardless.

 

[Twinkle]

Now, what was their reasoning behind shitty restrictive camera in Dung Siege?

If anything, AoD beta proved that rotating 3D cam is a fucking abomination that needs to die horrible death.

Actually, I think that AoD's camera was quite good. If they wouldn't have tried to be cinematic during the conversations, thus forching a change of the point of view each time, it would have been perfect. I don't understand some people's dislike of games in which you have the ability to control the camera. It would make no sense to use 3D graphics with a 2D-style fixed camera, and, in this day and age, a 3D engine is almost a given because it's easier to create and modify 3D assetts than 2D assetts and because there are much more available artists that are skilled in creating 3D assetts than 2D assetts.

It's not that I'm complaining about the ability to move and rotate camera, no, or asking them to go full 2D, which is indeed unreasonable. But areas should be designed with fixed camera in mind. If the camera is done right a user should never be required to move it manually. Case in point: the tower assault as an IG. As soon as you reach it camera goes nuts. You need to constantly rotate it to be able to notice archers considering that they can teleport in and out randomly. That's where Diablo 3-style camera could help, I think.

 

[Infinitron]

If I recall correctly, Brian already said that they'll use/are seriously considering using a 3D engine, so WL2 has minimal chances of having 2D Fallout/Arcanum/PS:T style of graphics. It's much more likely they'll go for something like the Van Buren/Silent Storm type of engine, which is something that Onyx is very well suited for.

Yeah, it'll be a 3D engine.

Ooh, inside information.
I am not surprised.

 

[Black]

Yeah, it'll be a 3D engine.

Game confirmed for bad already, go home, everyone.

 

[skuphundaku]

If I recall correctly, Brian already said that they'll use/are seriously considering using a 3D engine, so WL2 has minimal chances of having 2D Fallout/Arcanum/PS:T style of graphics. It's much more likely they'll go for something like the Van Buren/Silent Storm type of engine, which is something that Onyx is very well suited for.

Yeah, it'll be a 3D engine.

Onyx? I still can't say, but I kind of doubt it. inXile is doing all the programming, they need an engine they're familiar with or that is well-documented.
But the license cost of the engine was already in the base budget of $1M, so it's got nothing to do with the $2.1M, regardless.

Their recent games (Choplifter HD and Hunted: The Demon's Forge) have used the Unreal Engine. The problem is that the Unreal Engine is VERY expensive (last time I checked, it was something like $750k) and it is licensed on a per-game basis. When they developed these games for a publisher, it's most likely that they were provided with the Unreal Engine license by the publisher. In the case of WL2, there won't be anyone providing inXile with an Unreal Engine license and I doubt they started from the assumption that they'll spend $750k out of the initially projected $1M on the engine. That makes me think that the engine familiarity issue won't play a big part in the engine selection process.

 

[Stabwound]

I'm not a fan of 360 degree 3d engines like NWN and AoD. I guess if that's what we get then that's what we're stuck with, though...

 

[Spectacle]

Seriously 2Dfags, a modern GPU can render a 3D model in real time with far better quality than you could get with pre-rendered sprites in the late '90s. Fallout/arcanum style graphics systems are just plain obsolete.

I agree the game should be designed with a fixed camera in mind. Rotating the camera should just be an option to enjoy the scenery, not required to play the game.

 

[mindx2]

I know we're talking Wasteland and not Fallout here but is there an engine like Van Buren out there?

 

[Stabwound]

Seriously 2Dfags, a modern GPU can render a 3D model in real time with far better quality than you could get with pre-rendered sprites in the late '90s. Fallout/arcanum style graphics systems are just plain obsolete.

I agree the game should be designed with a fixed camera in mind. Rotating the camera should just be an option to enjoy the scenery, not required to play the game.

Has there ever been a 3D top down game with a fixed camera? Has there been one that worked well?

The only games I can think of are a few JRPGs.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

All I ask is that they make the 3D models look good and instantly distinguishable from each other when you're zoomed out

I don't want the newshit wasteful design where a character looks awesome with the camera two feet away in gameworld terms and you're happy you spent that much time dressing him up and then when you go to isometric view all the extra detail gets scaled away and turns into visual soup and in the end only the major features stand out

like whether that person has breasts and or if he's crossdressing or both and the type of weapon they're carrying

and dear god please no hdr where bright areas are bright as fuck and dark areas are atmospherically gloomy and you cannot see fuck all
does a fucking painting need bloom to be visually attractive no only obnoxiously designed movie posters and modern videogames apparently oh my god depth of field so realisssticcccc

 

[skuphundaku]

It's not that I'm complaining about the ability to move and rotate camera, no, or asking them to go full 2D, which is indeed unreasonable. But areas should be designed with fixed camera in mind. If the camera is done right a user should never be required to move it manually. Case in point: the tower assault as an IG. As soon as you reach it camera goes nuts. You need to constantly rotate it to be able to notice archers considering that they can teleport in and out randomly. That's where Diablo 3-style camera could help, I think.

If you design the areas with a fixed camera in mind, then you lose all the benefits of 3D that aren't related to the technical development of the game. The areas become more like a film set (like in Diablo 3). In AoD, the problems with the camera are created exclusively by the fact that the games tries to be cinematic and starts changing the point of view. If that shit could be disabled, then I wouldn't have anything bad to say about AoD's camera. I won't even go into the "enemies teleporting in" issue, because that's shit design. Also, realistic locations like those in AoD would be impossible to create (and still be playable) with a fixed camera like Diablo 3.

 

[skuphundaku]

I know we're talking Wasteland and not Fallout here but is there an engine like Van Buren out there?

I think Onyx should be able to pull off what Van Buren was trying quite easily.

 

[Infinitron]

Seriously 2Dfags, a modern GPU can render a 3D model in real time with far better quality than you could get with pre-rendered sprites in the late '90s. Fallout/arcanum style graphics systems are just plain obsolete.

I agree the game should be designed with a fixed camera in mind. Rotating the camera should just be an option to enjoy the scenery, not required to play the game.

Has there ever been a 3D top down game with a fixed camera? Has there been one that worked well?

The only games I can think of are a few JRPGs.

Warcraft 3?

 

[golgepapaz]

One thing I am curious is why 2.1 mil? Is Avellone's participation along with Obsidian's assets worth an extra 400,000 mullahs? Aside from Chris' working to improve literary depth and maybe design couple of locations and whatnot, will the DS3 engine be retrofitted, for example, to up the graphics fidelity or maybe help shorten the development time? I am not sure who reached out to who first, I am guessing Fargo, but this participation seem really borne out of excitement at the possibilities to exercise creativity without restraint. And clearly if this works out, Avellone can look forward to not only Kick it Forward but participation from inXile for his own Kickstarter ambitions. This is essentially another example of Kickstarter transforming a part of industry, this time outsourcing, not based on contract per se, but more through active participation. Like MCA said, interesting times.

Because it's partly a marketing stunt. There's no way they need an extra $600,000 to hire MCA and license some of the Obsidian tools. It's just a big announcement to drum up new interest and donations now that the kickstarter had more or less died off.

it's also a successful one . There are 1746 new backers for the last 8 hours (after the announcement) ,compared to 449 backers for the 24 hours before that. It seems like Brian is one sly motherfucker. Throw the holy name of the MCA in and get the money for financing the engine and development tools in one swift stroke.